Hacker News Reader

I came to the same conclusion. I downvote only if the comment is offensive. If it is wrong or I disagree (and I care) I add my own comment. Downvoting by itself adds nothing to the discussion. I think the current system works remarkably well and I dont feel the need for changes. I fear clutter more.

View on HN

I agree that the current system is reasonably good, but how and why it works is cultural. That means that as HN gets more popular it will work less and less well.

I'm frequently mystified by why a comment gets down-mud, and wish desperately that there were a simple mechanism for people to tell me why. I have no complaint, I accept that someone feels the comment should be down-mud, but I'd like to learn why they feel like that, and what it is they think I got wrong. Maybe I'll disagree, but at least I can learn from it.

"down-mud"?

Yes.

+ Thunk is the past tense of think,

+ lunk is the past tense of link (I lunk to that page)

+ cluck is the past tense of click (I cluck that link)

... and "down-mud" is the past tense of "down-mod".

I admit curiosity too. Sometimes it's obvious. One-liners dont fare too well, alas. Other times it's a poorly reasoned argument. That's usually apparent when someone below points out the errors of my ways. I think down modding because of a differing opinion is a bit rude. When I dont like someone's opinion, I upmod someone else.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com