
Meta HN: About the quality of discussion or rather the lack therof - mrleiter
Dear HN,<p>over recent months I have felt that the quality of the discussions has fallen below previous levels in terms of subject-related talk. Specifically, I find it annoying that more and more top comments or top replies to top comments are puns and&#x2F;or variations thereof.<p>A good laugh is healthy, I agree. But, to me, HN feels more and more like reddit. Phrases like &quot;I&#x27;ll probably get downvoted for...&quot; are nonsensical, as it does not help a meaningful discussion at all.<p>So, I ask of you - do you have the same feeling?<p>Kind regards,
======
dang
These perceptions are notoriously subject to bias: first, to sample bias,
because no one reads all the posts. And second, to whatever the bias is called
where we notice what we dislike or annoys us far more than what doesn't, and
thus overestimate how much of it there is. We see this most of all in claims
of HN's political bias.

Because of that, it's best to post links to specific posts to give examples of
what you're talking about. You might find that other people read those posts
quite differently, which can be interesting in its own right. Alternatively,
if they're posts that break the site guidelines
([https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)),
we should moderate them. You, and anyone else, are also welcome to email such
links to hn@ycombinator.com.

~~~
jnordwick
Why isn't this ever upheld anymore?

> Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're
> evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Ideological or political battle
> or talking points.

~~~
dang
It's upheld all the time. The proportion of that stuff is no greater than it
used to be.

As pg once put it, "note those words most and probably".
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4922380](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4922380)

~~~
jnordwick
In writing you call those "weasel words":

"words and phrases aimed at creating an impression that a specific or
meaningful statement has been made"

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

Essentially, if you were being honest, you would just say on topic is whatever
we decided it is, since the intentional ambiguity basically comes down to
that.

~~~
yesenadam
Throwing what seem utterly baseless accusations of dishonesty and bad faith
('intentional ambiguity', 'aimed at creating an impression that' etc), and
somehow you're the good guy here?

Would somehow "Topic X is never allowed" be somehow better? That would be
silly, but even then there would be arguments about whether a story was topic
X. Well, anyway, that guideline seems sensible to me. Not hard to understand
why every word is there, for those not blinded by frustration (or whatever you
were blinded by when you wrote that). I'm a huge fan of _Weasel Words_ , Don
Watson's excellent book, and I can't see a similarity. If you're so sure this
place is controlled by evil forces, you should live somewhere else, no?

------
DoreenMichele
On days when I am in a lot of pain and throwing up, discussion here often
sucks. People are mean to me and they don't understand me. The rest of the
time, it's pretty darn good. ;)

Also, some of the humor here makes obscure references and brings to light
excellent tidbits of science, history and wisdom I wouldn't otherwise be
exposed to.

------
jpalomaki
I've had this feeling, but not sure if it's justified. Could be also the
result of more users writing comments.

Since the down-voting is the tool we have been given, I have tried to be more
active in using it to mark comments that take discussion to wrong direction.

Some UI innovations might help here as well. Sometimes when inside thread, you
see it's heading to useless direction. Would be nice to be able to collapse
the thread without scrolling back up.

~~~
gt_
_> Since the down-voting is the tool we have been given, I have tried to be
more active in using it to mark comments that take discussion to wrong
direction._

I thought downvotes were to be used on posts which _don’t_ move the discussion
or contribute to it. For example, non-sequitors or inaccuracies. Judging which
direction is “wrong” sounds like opinion abuse to me.

One of my favorite parts of HN is intelligent and _diverse_ discussion, two
things I believe must exist hand in hand.

Maybe this is what you meant, but I would not choose to downvote you either
way.

~~~
toomuchtodo
“[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=658691](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=658691)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=392347](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=392347)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171”](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171”)

Ref:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16131314](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16131314)

~~~
DoreenMichele
Thanks.

I generally agree with that policy. The only real downside of that is that
minority views can be downvoted to hell merely for being a minority view. A
side effect of that is that minority members can get a lot of downvotes simply
for participating, no matter how well they express themselves, and this can
feel very unwelcoming and like there is a hostile atmosphere here.

I post as openly female. It isn't uncommon for me to get a lot of downvotes
and it is really hard for me infer meaningful signal from that. I often cannot
readily determine if I committed some social faux pas that violates the
guidelines or if I am getting some pile on of disagreement simply because I am
a demographic outlier who, therefore, has a different world view and expresses
myself differently.

I posit this is a de facto barrier to diversity on the site. It will cause a
lot of women and other minorities to simply not bother.

In fact, someone essentially said as much to me recently. They just don't
bother most of the time in part because of downvote patterns here.

~~~
toomuchtodo
I agree with your thesis, and while I posted my above comment to reference
what the "rules are, I upvote downvoted comments (including yours) when I
think they are of substance and have been unfairly downvoted even when I may
disagree with them. I try very hard not to downvote when I disagree with a
comment, only if I believe it doesn't contribute to the discussion in a
meaningful way.

I'm often downvoted when my perspective deviates from that of the HN bubble,
but I really don't mind. I'd rather have the discussion than worry about
worthless internet points; if it changes even one person's mind, or helps them
think or see a topic in a way they might not otherwise have, it's worth the
effort put forth.

TL;DR Don't worry about the downvotes. Can't change HN policies or other
people's actions and feelings, only your own.

~~~
DoreenMichele
I am in no way worried about internet points. My concern is trying to parse
social signalling. Downvotes can express rebuke of undesirable behavior here.
Ignoring that fact is not a good thing.

I am very leery of concluding that downvotes can be wholesale ignored simply
because I am a demographic outlier and many people will knee jerk disagree
with me. That fundamentally breaks an important social feedback loop.

I didn't make it to the leaderboard by assuming I was getting pushback merely
because I am female and men here are clearly sexist pigs and I can ignore
their rebuke. I put quite a lot of time and effort into sorting out what I
could ignore and what I needed to take seriously as an indicator that I needed
to do something differently.

Granted, what I did different wasn't necessarily what other people thought I
should. But that social feedback loop matters. It never works well to suggest
that minorities can and should simply wholesale ignore such feedback. That
goes bad places.

It has been extremely helpful to me that really ugly comments aimed at me are
often flagged to death. Unfortunately, this sometimes only happens if I point
it out. Then my comment pointing it out is often also flagged and/or
downvoted.

It has also been extremely helpful that some people give corrective upvotes.
I, also, do that to comments that I don't think really deserve to be in the
negatives. Getting back to even after being downvoted feels much, much more to
me like "Okay, others don't see it that way and your viewpoint is an outlier
for this forum" and much less like "Shut up, bitch. No one wants you here
anyway."

~~~
toomuchtodo
> My concern is trying to parse social signalling. Downvotes can express
> rebuke of undesirable behavior here. Ignoring that fact is not a good thing.

My point, which I didn't convey entirely well, is that you can't use downvotes
as a signal because there is no agreed upon criteria for when they should be
used. Don't agree with the comment? Downvote is fine. Don't think the comment
is on topic? Downvote. Have an emotional response to the comment? Downvote.
I'm not sure how you can pull signal out of that noise.

I say ignore downvotes because they should not be used as the anti-validation
of an idea, thought, or concept. The groupthink can be (and often is) wrong.

> It has been extremely helpful to me that really ugly comments aimed at me
> are often flagged to death.

Flagging _does_ have guidelines for their use, and ugly comments should (IMHO)
be flagged to death. There is a line between disagreement and incivility, but
that's what HN mods are for (thread detachment, ban warning, bans) and their
attention can be requested with those flags.

With all of that said, I think the HN moderators are fairly astute as to
whether someone is participating in good faith, and taking corrective action
if they're not. Sorry if we've gone off track. People are hard ¯\\_(ツ)_/¯
Assume positive intent until observation proves otherwise.

~~~
DoreenMichele
_My point, which I didn 't convey entirely well, is that you can't use
downvotes as a signal because there is no agreed upon criteria for when they
should be used. Don't agree with the comment? Downvote is fine. Don't think
the comment is on topic? Downvote. Have an emotional response to the comment?
Downvote. I'm not sure how you can pull signal out of that noise._

Very, very carefully and with a low statistical confidence level, relying
quite heavily on other factors to inform your conclusions.

As stated above, I think it is problematic to ignore them entirely. I don't
see how I could state that more clearly.

I'm aware that I generally think a great deal more about social stuff than
most people I meet. I'm aware I do sometimes overthink it and sometimes the
answer is "Someone fat fingered it and there really is no social signalling to
be derived from it."

~~~
pasabagi
I have doubts about what exactly the signal is you're receiving in any case.
Superbowl ads are popular. Agatha Christie is popular. Racism is popular.
Many, many awful things - indeed, most awful things, are very well liked by
most people.

As I see it, the only possible content of votes is popularity - which, when it
comes to quality, is a very bad metric. In a relatively small, educated group
like HN, it's a little bit less diabolically awful than it might be if it was
in, say, 1930's Germany, but it's still the same metric.

~~~
DoreenMichele
That does not fit with my experience of participating here.

------
sharmi
For what its worth: The same discussion was held on HN 8 years back on how the
quality of discussion has fallen.
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1198041](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1198041)

There are recurrent discussions in the same vein echoing back in (HN's) time.
I suppose they crop up whenever HN goes through a growth spurt. Just guessing.

I am not against quips and puns. HN is a gathering of people with a certain
area of interest and there is great fun is sharing puns that the community
identifies with. There are rarely such outlets outside this arena sans an in-
person meetup of aspiring startup geeks.

Having said that, such comments are usually in the mid rung and the tops ones
(within an hour of posting) tends to be indepth thoughtful ones by relevant
people. I have seen doctors, life guards, teachers, lawyers, and so many
others from various walks of life give profound insights in the comment
sections of relevant articles. So I would not discount the quality.

But discussions like this are worth for keeping the focus where it needs to
be.

------
mercer
I often use HN as an archive, so I end up in very old threads when I search
for particular things. As a result I quite often have tabs open with threads
that are years old. And more than once I tried commenting/upvoting, thinking
it was a recent thread.

I don't think you're wrong, but I do agree that it's easy to only remember the
good bits. Anecdotally at least apparently old threads can be just as bad, and
that's even after search for specific topics!

------
jnordwick
Group think is getting worse. If you have a minority opinion it is more
difficult to avoid the bottom of the heap, the standards for a post rise
dramatically, and even then there is no guarantee. Sometimes you comments will
hit the negatives regardless.

( Edit: heres my latest -2 comment which i really don't understand
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16401221](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16401221)
)

There are some sacred cow on HN too that you cannot go against:
meltdown/spectre is overblown, Google tech isn't the greatest, or numerous
economic or political opinions.

It also seems like there has been a relaxing of posting subject matter
requirements. Naked politics now hit the front page daily when mods used to
give at least lip service to deleting it. I think this has done a lot of bring
in tribalism - online political discussing seems to bring it out in people and
it spreads like a cancer to the rest of the site.

I think if you shoved the political discussion to a side channel, the
discussion all around would improve.

~~~
yesenadam
Hehe I had a look at your comment.. It started:

"Not new. Only read the first and last page if the paper.."

And you have no idea why that might be downvoted? I don't think you can have
tried to understand. Maybe the downvoters got no further than me (i.e. the bit
I quoted) which already has arrogance, ignorance, carelessness—or so it
seems—and had already had enough.

~~~
quickthrower2
Quite ironic

"I didn't read the whole paper but..."

"I didn't read your whole comment but I got to that bit and I downvoted you!"

~~~
yesenadam
Hehe yeah. _Hypocritical_ , you mean maybe. At least I didn't say there was
nothing new, and I restricted my..criticism to the bit I actually read. But
I'll upvote that. :-)

~~~
jnordwick
The rest of the paper was explaining concepts in computer architecture.

------
oceanghost
I feel that only a very narrow range of opinions are acceptable.

------
mod
I don't agree. I love the quality of HN discussions, and frankly it's the
entire reason I use the site.

I also hate to see puns and jokes on HN, but I'm glad to report that when I do
see them, they are usually downvoted at the bottom of the page.

I'm sure it's happened that a joke made the top comment, but I can't remember
ever seeing it in the thousands of comment sections I've read here.

------
hawktheslayer
I personally haven't found that. I find quality typically rises to the top,
and only an occasional worthy pun will make it up there. But of course my
opinion is anecdotal and heavily subject to bias. I just try to be a good
citizen here and add to the quality conversation whenever I feel like my
experience on a topic makes me able to contribute something of value.

------
wpasc
I find that HN discussion are the most relevant, least trolled discussions of
most well-known sites. However, I am biased because my exposure to comments
and discussions is mostly HN, some reddit, WSJ/NYTimes comments, and the
notorious YouTube comment sections.

------
verdverm
Seems to me like a general trend not limited to HN.

------
rabboRubble
No, I do not have the same feeling.

You can always try Reddit, Facebook, Fark, or your favorite topic-specific
forum for a different flavor of commentary.

------
twouhm
You might be noticing the eternal September effect, which is sadly starting to
affect HN.

~~~
krapp
Eternal September seems to have "sadly started to affect HN" since the very
beginning, or about a few months ago, depending on who you ask, and how old
their account is.

------
xstartup
I've stopped posting interesting comments because I get downvoted just because
my opinion is different.

Lately, I began to feel HN is full of people who sell their time. They just
can't believe that anyone might be willing to work for free. Here is the
evidence:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16400111](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16400111)
Albeit, it's not enough to draw this kind of conclusion.

See this one:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16391332](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16391332)

Here I simply asked for people's opinion of the experience on different
platforms.

From now I'll just read and rarely post. My work area is ad tech and people
here seem not like ads much and will downvote/ignore ad tech questions.

~~~
auxbuss
My perception is that downvoting has increased. I often upvote downvoted
comments that are perfectly reasonable, though I might disagree with them (or
simply not care much), because downvoting can alienate folk from commenting –
I've had that before myself – and I want to read the best content.

re ads: I hate them, but I would only contemplate downvoting someone claiming
that the internet would die without them – the whole entitlement to push them
to my eyeballs thing – unless the comment cited evidence.

------
xstartup
> "I'll probably get downvoted for..." are nonsensical

It's a psychological trick.

