Ask HN: Accountability for down voting? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Accountability for down voting?

9 pointsneilellis13 comments

Being downvoted to zero is very demoralising as it makes the commenter feel the same as having their comment flagged in other systems. Like for example causing flamebait, hatred, inappropriateness etc.

I would like to suggest two things:

1) Downvotes are only used for flagging. Upvotes are used for agreeing. This way the statement most agreed with gets to the top, fine, but no valid comment is downvoted to the point it is greyed out.

2) Downvoting should not be invisible, there should at the very least be a mechanism to explain the downvote (even if that is simply a single word with a link, like Profanity, Flamebait, Racism etc.)

Lurkers please upvote if you feel this is worthy of consideration :-)

View on HN

This post was killed by user flags.

It's best to come to any kind of forum where there's a diverse crowd with a thicker skin.

Here is a short, non-exhaustive list of reasons why you'll get downvoted:

* Someone accidentally clicked it; there's no undo.

* You said something factually incorrect.

* You said something emotionally horrible or embodying prejudice.

* You said something that didn't contribute to the discussion in a meaningful way. One word comments are a prime example of this.

* Similar to the above would, your comment is profoundly off-topic; bible verses are an example.

* You said something that was poorly reasoned.

* You're trolling, or pissing people off beyond reason without merit.

* You're promoting in an unpalatable way.

There is a mechanism for explaining the downvote: a reply to the downvoted comment. Most of the time someone will explain why the downvoting happened, if it's not already painfully obvious, or it's a troll comment.

At the end of the day, it's only an integer in a database and I don't support this idea. Also, there's a flag button for pretty egregious comments and posts, which would make downvoting for the purposes of flagging redundant.

"Come with a thicker skin."

Ah the sins that have hidden behind that comment, many of late :-)

I cannot state enough my comment did not violate any of the above and I am suggest this not because I feel slighted, but because I think the system is unwelcoming and can be improved.

It's much nicer to ask people why the feel a particular way than just start with 'you're wrong'. Especially when they're saying these things to help improve something they love.

> Being downvoted to zero is very demoralising as it makes the commenter feel the same as having their comment flagged in other systems. Like for example causing flamebait, hatred, inappropriateness etc.

As a counterpoint, downvotes serve as a signal that you said something bad and now have an opportunity to learn (which is better than beign flagged on forums, which goes on a permanent record of sorts). If you got flagged on forums for flaming/spamming, you know not to do that again, and what happens if you do.

Yes, there are silly reasons for being downvoted on Hacker News in particular, but it's not something that should be taken personally.

Not taking it personally - however it is demoralizing - and therefore discouraging.

Take as a truly hypothetical situation that a commenter came out as gay in a comment and that comment got downvoted so that it appears greyed out and had a negative number next to it.

Would that be welcoming?

That's what I'm suggesting is negative, it's unnecessary to have a system that actively discourages people because someone doesn't agree with them.

And don't forget not all of us (and I am an active HN user) can downvote. So we get a skewed view of people's comments. Simple accountability (i.e. the reason for downvoting) would cure this.

If people disagree with a comment they simply won't vote for it, and will upvote a comment they agree with. That's why I feel it's unnecessary to have downvoting by opinion.

IMHO - of course :-)

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

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I know what you mean though. It can be demoralizing, but it can also be a good time for self reflection. I never thought it was useful to view upvotes/downvotes as agreement/disagreement. Rather I see downvotes as a hint that a comment is not making a meaningful contribution (e.g. a throwaway joke); flagging isn't really appropriate there. And I see an upvote as "this is good content even if I don't agree with it 100%."

In the case that prompted this I was in fact saying that men should do their part to combat sexism and was down voted to zero immediately.

Which is someone's opinion, not a flippant comment by me or objectionable content.

I followed the advice given by the person who downvoted me (I think) and opened this thread here.

It may well be boring reading, but I feel it is worthy of discussion by those who care about how it would make others feel.

Personally honestly I couldn't care less if I was banned from ever posting on Hacker News. I do however care that issues worthy of discussion are not suppressed, even if they are being suppressed without any malice.

Anyway if no-one cares about the subject this thread will disappear anyway :-) Which is also fine :-)

If you're refering to this comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8435630) you likely didn't get downvoted for saying "men should do their part to combat sexism." You likely got downvoted because you went on a complete tangent. (Slavery?)

Slavery was used as a metaphor. The oppression of one group by the other - a general imbalance of power.

And no that wasn't the reason I was downvoted because to quote:

"Okay, fine. I downvoted you because you seem to be blaming him for answering a direct question and also for saying it's women's problem when he said it was management's responsibility."

I.e. I was agreeing with the view held in the related article.

I treat being downvoted as editorial feedback on the quality of my writing. It means [usually] that I failed to connect with the audience. Perhaps my point was not clearly made, or I misunderstood an ancestor comment, or even that I trolled or said something just plain unproductive.

Depending on the circumstances a rewrite may be a good idea. Other times I'll just delete a lousy comment. Only occasionally will I treat a down vote as a character flaw in someone else, and then as one I share.

In the end writing good comments pretty much takes care of downvotes.

I don't even know how to downvote. Do you need a high level of karma to do that ?

edit: Actually I found the answer here : https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html

Yes, 500 I believe

This thread is now disappearing forever but anyway for posterity, ignoring the title and the pretty inaccurate article: http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/03/the-value-of-downvotin... the discussion in the comments is very interesting.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com