Ask HN: Downvoting without replying | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Downvoting without replying

12 pointsxk_id15 comments

I find it frustrating that I have posts that got downvoted, yet they have no critique posted in reply. What I receive is a completely ambiguous signal, so it kindof defies the purpose of communication, no?

Edit: I just realised it's probably simpler than that. Downvoting is not a communication signal, it's a mechanism for decreasing the likeliness that we will see a user's comments at the top of threads. So, I should probably rephrase what I posted into an invitation to do post critiques if you so feel inclined :) Either it may allow me to defend my position, or better myself.

View on HN

I don't understand that line of thinking actually (that people should reply when they downvote). Do you get upset if someone upvotes you but doesn't not reply? It seems they are done for opposite reasons.

Some of the reasons I upvote:

  - I agree w/ OP

  - I appreciate the time taken, or the thoroughness of the response/post

  - I appreciate that the post adds to the discussion

  - I appreciate that OP was able to ask a question in a nice way

  - I feel someone has added something significant

  - I get a cheap laugh that isn't terribly pun-y

  - I had too much coffee that day

Some of the reasons I downvote:

  - I don't agree w/ OP and I think they are either wrong are spreading misinformation

  - I think OP is using FUD or other "techniques"

  - OP has included a lot of hyperbole

  - OP responded without being kind, thoughtful, or thorough in the response

  - OP made a blanket statement with no citation ("Blue is clearly the wrong color. Period.")

  - OP did not add anything significant ("+1 here too")

  - OP went for a cheap laugh with pun-y, low-wit, or over-used memes ("That's what she said!")

  - OP posted something that I feel is not HN-worthy or against the guidelines

  - I had too much coffee that day

I'm sure there are more on each side. So did you do any of those?

> I'm sure there are more on each side. So did you do any of those?

Well, technically, how the hell would I know? :)

But, thanks for the comprehensive lists! I'm fairly new here!

I don't downvote when I think someone's wrong.

I will give my standard response. Downvotes happen for all sorts of reasons - I've downvoted stuff because I was being an asshole. It happens. I have bad days. Occasionally, I will respond to a comment I downvoted. In those cases my response will imply that I downvoted. But usually I don't respond because any response would be mostly unproductive.

I've also been downvoted more times than I care to remember. Someone might say I shouldn't care. They would be wrong.

The healthiest way to look at downvotes isn't to ignore them. It is to treat them as editorial feedback on the quality of my post. Maybe my point wasn't communicated clearly. Maybe my assertions are unwarranted based on the support I offered. Maybe my tone is corrosive to the community. Maybe even my idea is stupid or flat out wrong.

There are a few options. Sometimes I just take the hit. I said what I meant and mean what I said. Sometimes I will edit my comment - rewriting is writing. I don't usually mark my edits unless they make the discussion confused.

And sometimes I will recognize that my comment is lousy and delete it.

Those are the things that are within my control.

In the end the best response to downvotes is to write better.

I take it you are referring to the comments in the chomsky thread:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5061916

Only one of which got downvoted without any critique, and it was a one-word comment that did not contribute to the conversation at all. Such one word comments defy the purpose of communication.

No, that's not the only one I'm referring to. By downvoting I mean general downvoting, not just reaching <= 0. It happened in some cases, that the score of a comment kept going up and down for a while, without anyone replying.

Ah I see. Ok, thats's perfectly normal, it is a reflection of people agreeing/disagreeing with what you wrote or how well they think you've contributed to the discussion.

If I can give you two tips for continued survival on HN: ignore the points and do your homework.

The standard of conduct and comment on average is a lot higher here than on other fora. The last couple of days have been pretty rough and are not representative of the longer term.

I think that a lot of times a downvote can simply be interpreted as an "I disagree with your position" comment. I think there is a pg quote along those lines somewhere in the archives.

Addendum:

After a little research this is the closest thing I can find that pg said. Maybe I was mistaken in my recollection.

"I sometimes downvote things that seem mistaken. I think most users do."[1]

[1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1006808

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171

No, at one point pg definitely condoned downvoting comments for pure disagreement. Poor idea, in my opinion.

It does tend to cut down on (but could never eliminate) a certain sort of back and forth "nuh uh!" bickering.

No? Do you mean "no, your recollection is not incorrect"?

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=392347

yes :) I was replying to "Maybe I was mistaken in my recollection"

I don't see this one covered: Sometimes a downvote means absolutely nothing. I am on an android and I sometimes accidentally downvote when intending to upvote, click a user name, or just trying to navigate.

I prefer feedback. I had a hard time getting it for a long time. But not all votes are meaningful. I think it helps to remember that. And when a vote is fatfingered, the person who did it may not even realize it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com