Hacker News Reader

Comment by sparknlaunch12 | Hacker News Reader

Strange that this has been greyed out? Not condoning the act of plagiarism but seems fairer to allow all parties to say their bits?

View on HN

It's our way of voicing very clear disagreement.

Anyone who wants to read his words still can.

You think otherwise he might not know people disagree? Voting really shouldn't be punitive to people with unpopular opinions.

I think otherwise he might not realize the breadth and depth at which this community disagrees with him. He is not merely expressing an unpopular opinion, he's demonstrated an inability to grasp certain basic concepts. Don't think of it as punitive; think of it as a wake-up call.

Also, according to pg, it is and always has been perfectly fine to downvote people for disagreement: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=392347 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=658691

Why shouldn't it? The only way to get rid of bad ideas is to shame them out of existence.

What is bad idea to you could not be a bad idea to me

Nobody is stopping you from upvoting his posts.

Really? That's the only way?

I do wish this wasn't downvoted to grey. This is content I think most of us will find interesting and relevant to the discussion.

I understand that HN allows downvotes of disagreement, even though in this case it buries the most relevant information.

I vehemently disagree with Zee in this case, but I upvoted his posts because I believe his position deserves to be heard. This goes double for when the other person is mis-handling the fallout. I recommend putting half-baked defenses to the top so everyone can see the person's poor character.

I actually think the grey has the opposite effect, makes the post really stand out and i go out of my way to high-light and read it, if only to see why the person was downvoted so much.

To stay on topic I can't believe the guy still hasn't apologized. Judging by his attitude and replies he's probably too busy self-rationalizing about how he's right and if everyone else wasn't an idiot we would all agree with him.

Mentioned elsewhere: I'm not complaining about the specific text contrast. My concern is with downvotes being misused (albeit for my own definition of misused).

Downvoting also has the effect of lowering the comment's position relative to other replies. No matter the color, the comment will appear below someone who gets a higher score, even though I can't imagine a more relevant comment than from the guy this entire thread (and post) is really centered around.

Highlight it then and read it. Or change your browser colours.

It's not the text contrast that bothers me. It's that we're effectively trying to censor someone directly related to the article, if only for the fact that we believe him to be wrong. I would prefer that his comments are perceived as most relevant to the discussion at hand, and upvoted (or at least left alone) so that the comment can stand on its own.

Zee's 'punishment' shouldn't come in the form of mass downvoting and censorship. His punishment should be publicity. Let the community see what he has to say and judge his actions, not his comments.

How are his comments censored? I managed to read them perfectly fine. Censoring would be removal of a comment, not changing the font colour.

I think that's a rather narrow definition of censorship. Maybe you would prefer the term 'suppressed'. Either way, the intent is to signal to readers, "the community consensus is that this comment is not valuable, or does not add to the discussion. It is likely not worth your time to read".

The whole point of voting is that higher-rated comments are brought to the top of the page, making them more visible. Most people don't read every comment.

It's because of people downvoting him.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com