Downvoting on HN | Hacker News Reader

Downvoting on HN

2 pointsmedianama21 comments

I've observed (on multiple occasions) that my comments get down voted only because it goes against the popular viewpoint.

For Example - I gave an example of how little press cares to check authenticity of your comments and the fact they worry only about making interesting stories. I got down voted by everyone. I've gone through the guidelines and I don't think I've said anything that goes against it.

Have you also observed similar behavior on HN?

I got -6 for this - http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=559651 - which I believe was a very good example.

Guidelines on Comments - I don't think I am violatig any of those --------------- Be civil. Don't say things you wouldn't say in a face to face conversation.

When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. E.g. "That is an idiotic thing to say; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."

Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them.

Please don't sign comments, especially with your url. They're already signed with your username. If other users want to learn more about you, they can click on it to see your profile.

Please don't use uppercase for emphasis. If you want to emphasize a word or phrase, put asterisks around it and it will get italicized.

Please don't submit comments complaining that a submission is inappropriate for the site. If you think something is spam or egregiously offtopic, you can flag it by going to its page and clicking on the "flag" link. (Not all users will see this; there is a karma threshold.) If you flag something, please don't also comment that you did.

Resist complaining about being downmodded. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.

Please don't bait other users by inviting them to downmod you.

You were downvoted because of the apparent unethical practice of making up data and the duping bloggers into using your story. HN is a pretty ethical group of people and pretty much dont appreciate this kind of thing. Excepting wiseass remarks, I'm rarely downvoted, and if it's done unfairly, someone else usually jumps to my defense. Maybe others view your unpopular comments as trolling.

Resist complaining about being downmodded. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.

ahem.

Essentially, the guidelines are pretty much related to how you post comments. They are stylistic suggestions.

In the case of the comments you linked to, what the readership (and I personally) took offense at, is the fact that you proudly proclaim that you lied to the media, and then claim that it's just being "resourceful."

To summarize: you sound like someone with no moral values whatsoever.

I haven't worked with anyone who doesn't inflate numbers while pitching to customers, VCs, and/or partners. Would you consider them with no moral values as well...

How do you draw a line?

Having said this - even if I have no moral values whatsoever, I don't think I should be down voted...

Great! Now all my comments would be down voted...

Just because you don't agree doesn't mean you should down vote me...

In fact, you guys are proving my point.

I think people wouldn't down vote you if you made a genuine effort to defend your position. Lame excuses like "everyone else is doing it" and "it's not actually wrong" don't count.

You should do some research on "guidelines" versus "rules".

Also: the internet is hard, if you're going to say something in public, you need a thicker skin.

I gave an example of how little press cares to check authenticity of your comments and the fact they worry only about making interesting stories.

Let's link back to the original comment in question.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=559651

In my personal experience, if you want press to write about you/your startup, you'll have to give them interesting stories that their readers like to read.

They don't have too much attention span. They don't care about how hard/easy it is do, or even if it is true or not. They just care about interesting stories...

For one of my stories I told them that we did some survey and just made up the findings. They loved it and published it next day without looking at my data or even asking me methodology of survey/research

In the context of the overall thread,

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=559646

that looked a lot like giving advice, because that was a direct reply to an "Ask HN" thread-opening post.

I still don't understand why it should be down voted...

Your value system may be different from mine. If the advice doesn't make sense to you, move on, try something else..

> Your value system may be different from mine. If the advice doesn't make sense to you, move on, try something else..

Your reasons for downvoting may be different from mine. If you're being downvoted, move on, try something else..

Bad advice deserves to get downvoted.

If people think something is bad advice, that doesn't mean they don't understand it --- it can mean they understand it all too well.

"I think it's ok to use the up and down arrows to express agreement." -- PG

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

(Maybe this should be mentioned in the guidelines, as it comes up occasionally?)

> "I think it's ok to use the up and down arrows to express agreement." -- PG

I don't.

Up & down votes affect what people see on the site. Do we want HN to be full of ideas that reflect majority opinions, or do we want it to be full of interesting, useful, thought-provoking things? I would much rather it is the latter. (More to the point, if it ever stops being the latter, then I'm out of here.)

If all you mentioned was the fact that press doesn't check its facts, you might not have been down-voted. However, you almost encouraged others do that and boasted of yourself doing; that's what got you the down-votes.

Yes, the comment mentioned feeding made-up "facts" to the press, and a lot of the downvotes doubtless were made to show disagreement with that practice. Right now, downvoting means either

a) I disagree with the fact (or policy) mentioned in the comment,

or

b) I think the comment undermines the HN community,

and in the case of a comment about lying to the press, both interpretations of the meaning of a downvote might lead to a downvote on such a comment.

I didn't encourage anyone to do that. I just stated the fact to prove that journalists have a very short attention span

"In my personal experience, if you want press to write about you/your startup, you'll have to give them interesting stories that their readers like to read." (emphasis mine)

Come on. Get over it, learn from it, and just move on.

Now, Why was this comment down voted?

Because nobody likes a whiner.

teh internet = serious business

Reply on news.ycombinator.com