
HN Ignore downvotes CSS - quickthrower2
https://gist.github.com/anonymous/ac936f87662ed0b1f6def0a65f870c69
======
fnayr
I'm still working my way towards earning the downvote! I have been on the site
for over 6 years and browse more than I contribute, but I still am shy a
little of the 500 karma required. I wonder if there are users with even older
accounts than mine that are still active and don't have the karma yet either.

~~~
cjhveal
For what it's worth, my account is older by ~7 months and I'm not yet halfway
there.

~~~
fnayr
Okay interesting, I thought I was alone. Guess there's a lot of us
"noncontributors" on here haha.

~~~
5555624
Or "occasional" contributors. My biggest problem is I am often reading the
comments a couple of days later and the discussion is no longer active.

~~~
BrandoElFollito
This is a real problem. I noticed that all my (infinitesimal) karma was
received on comments which were a few hours old.

The brilliant comments which are 1+ day old all went to a blackhole nirvana.

------
superasn
I wish the downvote button was two step (while upvote as is) where a user had
to select from things like _off topic_ , _spam_ , etc. Maybe a decoy
_disagree_ too for letting the new user downvote but not counting it.

~~~
laumars
Im a firm believer that one shouldn't be allowed to downvote without leaving a
comment. In instances like spam or trolling we have the 'flag' option, which
if abused should then cost people karma and/or the privilege of moderation.

I say this because I often get downvoted because people don't understand my
point (sometimes due to my own fault badly explaining myself, sometimes the
readers fault for skimming my post) and it's not until several downvoted
before someone finally chimes in an clarifies why.

Negative rep get so badly abused on this site and the most frustrating thing
about it all is whenever the topic gets raised you get downvoted to hell.

There is also a disappointing trend to kneejerk downvote any comment that
disagrees with any of the "famous" (for want a better description) names on HN
simply because member "xyz" must be wrong if they're arguing with the famed
member "abc"; regardless of whatever point xyz had made. It's daft hero
worshipping.

Then there's the amount of times people can get down voted on popular threads
just because they dared express and unpopular opinion.

Overall I genuinely think the quality of comments on this site has dropped
over the years and I think it's directly related to the increase in members
reaching the threshold to negative moderate. It gets harder to have an adult
conversation when half the time people are kneejerk downvoting rather than
posting a rebuttal or simply asking for clarification on why an opinion was
formed to begin with. It's gotten to the point that I'm sure many people now
question whether they can be bothered with the potential backlash or whether
they're better off just keeping quiet. Which results in some tropes (for want
a better description) not getting peer reviewed or debunked because it's such
a popular piece of misinformation that the correction isn't worth the
backlash.

Lastly, I get sick of people saying we shouldn't take negative rep personally.
It's someone actively saying "I don't agree with you but I'm not going to
state why." There is no other response to that other than frustration.

~~~
dragonwriter
> Im a firm believer that one shouldn't be allowed to downvote without leaving
> a comment.

The purpose of downvoting is to reduce the effective signal to noise ratio by:

(1) reducing the prominence of low-quality posts, and

(2) signalling the types of posts the community finds to be low quality, which
will then be reduced in prominence.

Commenting _increases_ the prominence of a post, and as such counteracts part
of the purpose of downvotes. It may occasionally be warranted to reinforce the
_other_ half of the purpose, but generally not.

> I say this because I often get downvoted because people don't understand my
> point

Just because someone else suggests that as their reason or a possible reason
does not mean that is why other people are downvoting you.

> There is also a disappointing trend to kneejerk downvote any comment that
> disagrees with any of the "famous" (for want a better description) names on
> HN simply because member "xyz" must be wrong if they're arguing with the
> famed member "abc"; regardless of whatever point xyz had made.

I don't think that's true at all; I do think that replies to some of the more
well-known posters are more likely to get read and, therefore, voted up or
down, but I don't see a lot of evidence for the kind of fan-club voting you
suggest (I don't think I'd be _on_ the leaderboard if that was the case, since
I think even when I was fairly new a fair share of my posts were disagreeing
with some of the more prominent figures here.)

> Then there's the amount of times people can get down voted on popular
> threads just because they dared express and unpopular opinion.

IME, that doesn't really happen. _Any_ opinion on a controversial thread can
get downvoted for no apparent reason -- there defintely are people who
downvote for shallow disagreement -- but it rarely seems to last if there
isn't a better reason for downvoting, and it seems to happen across the space
of ideas (I've seen HN be accused of being a left-wing hive mind, a
libertarian hive-mind, and a hive-mind of several different other bents; its
not any of those, its got lots of different active factions with lots of
different views.)

> It gets harder to have an adult conversation when half the time people are
> kneejerk downvoting rather than posting a rebuttal or simply asking for
> clarification on why an opinion was formed to begin with.

I'd rather say it gets harder to have an adult conversation when people lack
the introspection to realize the reasons that their comments are getting
downvoted into oblivion while others expressing similar ideology in a
different manner or not has nothing to do with disagreement, or popular poster
fan clubs, and everything to do with the quality of their posts.

> There is no other response to that other than frustration.

Yes, there is another possible response and its called introspection and
review of the guidelines.

I've gotten posts downvoted, and of those that have stayed that way more than
a few hours, the vast majority have deserved it and I've gotten better at
_not_ making the same mistakes. Sure, I think there have been some mistakes
(but I have seen a lot more cases of posts of mine being _upvoted_ that don't
deserve it.)

~~~
laumars
I see your point about the reason for lowering the prominence of "bad"
comments but frankly I think misinformed comments deserve more detailed
corrections than just down voting. It means people actually learn something
rather than misinformation getting if ores and thus continue to be spread. In
fact some of the best comments on here have been people writing detailed
rebuttals

Also I think from your last paragraph you do agree that moderation often gets
abused even if you don't agree with the individual points I raised?

~~~
dragonwriter
> Also I think from your last paragraph you do agree that moderation often
> gets abused even if you don't agree with the individual points I raised?

I think it works well in aggregate, even though there are some individual bad
votes. I think that the system is designed in a way which anticipates
imperfection in individual acts but is designed to get good results on-
balance, and I think obsessing about the individual bad votes is unproductive
in most cases.

~~~
laumars
The problem is that it's no longer individual bad votes. I would estimate that
at least 1 in 5 of my comments are voted down (albeit just to zero) with no
obvious reason why. While the rest of my comments are typically voted up
fairly substantially. I don't vary the quality of my posts and try not to make
a habit of commenting on topics I'm ill informed in. So either I'm being
singled out by an individual with a grudge (which I doubt but I think HN is
smart enough to detect those kind of voting patterns anyway?) or the
moderation system on here is broken. Either way I can't predict which posts
will get voted on in which way and the individual bad votes have now become
anything but sparse.

------
amingilani
To see everything on HN, go to your settings and enable Show Dead. You'll also
get to see comments that were killed off.

~~~
cookiecaper
This is absolutely worth it. I've been reading like this maybe half of my
account's lifecycle. It is rare to see legitimate spam. More often you find
real posts from accounts that trip the "spam account" detector because they're
throwaways, or controversial but valid opinions that got flagkilled.

Sometimes you'll even find real accounts that have a years-long history of
meaningful contribution. [0] It is most infuriating when these people get
hellbanned just for pushing the limit once, or for triggering the mods extra
hard one day.

[Quick note on old accounts that earn hellbans: I've noticed a correlation
between the posting of something MRA-ish/anti-feminist and accounts getting a
permanent hellban. If you have such political leanings (which I'm not
endorsing or supporting) and want your account to remain in good standing,
don't let them leak out on HN. Go to your regularly-scheduled Disgusting
Online Den of Scum and Villainy (TM). It may be that this is only noticed
because most other hot-button issues are already understood to be taboo, but
sometimes the gender-in-tech threads run afield...]

There is a whole cast of characters that you can only find if you showdead.
Most of these people have since realized that it's a waste of time to post
here and gone away, but you'll still see the regulars pop up now and then, or
find them in historic threads.

There is pg_is_a_butt, whose posts are sometimes insightful, except he ends
each one with something like "you're all idiots". There is LoseThos, author of
the amazing TempleOS [1], who will usually post some form of incoherent babble
that is framed up like scripture. These are usually not worth much by
themselves, but they remind me that he exists, which is great. And there are
the heartbreaking cases mentioned above, of good contributors getting flagged
off and seeing their profile activity slowly peter out as they wonder why no
one replies to their posts anymore. [Vouching can actually make this more
confusing, because they have ONE comment that gets replies/interest, so assume
they must not be shadowbanned, they just must be going senile and have nothing
worth saying anymore. You'll also get your vouching rights revoked if you
vouch for something the mods don't like.]

Anyway, there's usually a discernible reason for something to be dead, but
it's frequently not a good one. You'll be missing out on a lot of good stuff
by keeping showdead off.

Disclaimer, lest one plunge in too anxiously: there are also things that truly
deserve the flag and/or ban, and you'll have to tolerate seeing that. It helps
that HN doesn't allow media embeds, but do be careful following links, etc.,
and probably avoid if your sensitivity to offensive text or ideas is higher
than your interest in useful-but-controversial information.

[0]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=X86BSD](https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=X86BSD)

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TempleOS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TempleOS)

~~~
ulucs
> Go to your regularly-scheduled Disgusting Online Den of Scum and Villainy
> (TM).

Ah 4chan, the only true bastion of the right to free speech

~~~
rjeli
4chan is moderated too...

------
yup123
be nice if the downvote button would be removed entirely, I believe more HNers
would speak their mind.

~~~
yorwba
Maybe, but I don't think that would improve the quality of discussion. When I
get downvoted, it's usually because I'm a) factually wrong b) didn't explain
the reasoning behind a counterintuitive statement or c) disagreed with someone
on an emotionally charged topic. At least in cases a) and b), downvotes help
me improve my writing.

~~~
lowpro
Definitely agree. I find when I'm downvoted it was due to being an impulsive
post rather than a well thought out post.

With the amount you see people say 'I'll get downvoted for this but...' then
go on to be the top post, I think the downvoted helps more than hurts.

There's groupthink of course, but I feel the HN community is more responsible
with it, and that comes from someone who often disagrees with the majority
(personally, rarely expressed).

------
dmichulke
Title suggestion:

HN Show Downvoted Comments as Normal CSS

Yes: it's a step _against_ the filter bubble

------
gnicholas
Interesting concept. I am the creator of the BeeLine Reader browser plugin,
which applies a color gradient to make text blocks easier/faster to read. I go
back and forth on whether this functionality is a net benefit on sites like
HN, where our text coloring obfuscates the underlying color (and the
downvoting that it communicates).

Sometimes I will disable it on HN if I'm engaging in a lot of discussions
where I'd like to be able to see if other comments have been downvoted. If
anyone else here uses this plugin, I'd be very interested to know if you've
disabled it on HN or if you find the functionality to be helpful. We can make
it default on/off on certain sites, so feedback is appreciated.

------
Jerry2
Downvotes (and flaggings) on comments are HN's biggest flaw. It has turned
this site into a giant echo chamber and has completely killed any chance of
having diversity of opinions.

If you do not conform, you will be downvoted into oblivion. So people censor
themselves as a result.

~~~
yesenadam
>If you do not conform, you will be downvoted into oblivion.

Is that true though? Conform in what way?

Who cares about being downvoted anyway?? I don't get it. After a few tantrums
about it, I've realized _it doesn 't matter_, I don't need to add _edit: Could
downvoters explain why please_ if they don't explain. Why do I care about my
internet points, why am I getting sucked in to caring about the gamification?
Why does it matter?

Say you are right, some opinions, even expressed articulately, helpfully,
admirably etc are still always downvoted "into oblivion". So if you care, if
it's important for you to change minds on it, try even harder to be more
informed, articulate, irreproachable than the alleged HN 'conformists'. Hehe
already talking like that, 'If you do not conform' has that heroic-paranoid-
martyr sound to it that frequently downvoted/rate-limited people get. The
people that ranted bitterly on the _What has HN given you?_ page. They think
it's _what_ they say that's the problem, but in my experience it's inevitably
_how_ they say it. But every further downvote just 'proves' to them they're
right.

And I'm not sure why you think HN would be better without oblivion-
downvoting/flagging. More like Youtube, sure. But _better_? "Completely killed
any chance", "giant echo chamber".. such dramatic language. Is your tone of
such absolute certainty justified? Well, still there are people who think the
dominant 'conformity' on HN is pro-US, anti-US, socialist, libertarian, and
pro- and anti- just about anything you can imagine.

~~~
Annatar
“Is that true though?”

It is very real. And systemic.

When an unsubstantiated Docker or Kubernetes piece shows up as a story here,
try asking a simple “why is that stubbornly getting pushed instead of
alternatives?” and observe getting no answer to a simple “why?” while it gets
downvoted under a pretense of being unsubstantiated, although the motivation
for the story itself is unsubstantiated. What happens in reality is that you
dared to ask a critical question which goes against ego-stroking and mob
mentality. Or try asking or criticizing Rust or just mentioning Rust
evangelism strike force to see just how much of an echo chamber this place is;
it will be a fascinating psychosocial experiment on crowd mentality and ego-
reassurance.

We are now at the point in our global societal evolution where why’s have
become dangerous, considered oppositional, often considered confrontational,
and that is deeply disturbing, because I’ve seen and lived through situations
where such thinking leads. It’s a very subtle form of fascism in a different
package. “HN” just reflects the wider systemic problems with group think
dynamics.

~~~
yesenadam
>you dared to ask a critical question which goes against ego-stroking and mob
mentality

But here's that paranoid-heroic-martyr tone again. Maybe it wasn't a "simple"
question, but the frustration at these things happening again and again drives
you to feel justified in petulant, angry accusations, or even just an
irritatingly whiny tone. Doesn't it say in the guidelines not to question
items, but to flag them etc? It's tedious for people to read that again and
again. Just don't read them, maybe?

Sure, there are fashions in these things. And in all things. But why do you
feel so superior and altogether above that, while using your psychobabble
labels—"crowd mentality and ego-reassurance","evangelism"? The very downvoting
you should expect as inevitable here is something you must fight and totally
overcome everywhere, _right now_. (i.e. the hysterical quality people find so
objectionable in SJWs) Really, 'fascism'?! You are the 'brave', 'daring' one
huh? And _they_ are the ones doing the 'ego-stroking'? Ah anyway, what do I
know, I'm new here. Best wishes!

