

HN: How does one get feedback on comments? - larryfreeman

How does one get feedback on comments with low mod scores without bringing up downmoding?<p>Downmoding is by its nature ambiguous:<p>Is the comment unclear?<p>Is the comment in bad taste?<p>Is the comment factually wrong?<p>Is the comment really troll bait?<p>Is the comment insensitive?<p>Many comments, especially when they are short, may be misinterpreted.  This is hard to decipher when there are no replies to a comment.<p>Talking about downmods is boring. Helping posters to clarify their comments may turn out to be interesting.<p>One way to do this is to allow people to associate a label with a comment.  When a poster sees these labels, it will give that person the ability to post a clarification.<p>The assigner of a label would be anonymous. People could then vote on these labels so that they only stick if enough people don't disagree.<p>People shouldn't have to put on their karma helmet to get feedback.<p>What do you think?
======
joel_feather
It's really not that important why your comment got up or downvoted. So don't
get all worked up about it. Just smile, and go write a new comment on
something else.

------
quizbiz
I find myself constantly glancing at my karma score. I have to remind myself
that it does not really matter.

I find my better comments begin with a short initial response, and then after
a line break, I go into detail about my thought process if need be.

~~~
zimbabwe
I find that it helps if you distance yourself from your account somewhat. When
I posted under an account related to my name and my activities, I felt
pressured to think and act a certain way and I monitored my karma a bit
closely. Using a blank-name account stopped me from worrying so much.

------
evdawg
I think this would be a neat project for a GreaseMonkey script-- those who
want to see it can, those who don't, won't.

~~~
vorador
Not everyone uses firefox. However, it could be an option like "noprocrast".

~~~
thwarted
Don't let browser market share keep you from doing something you think might
be cool. "Not everyone uses firefox" is the inverse logic of "IE6 is still
used, so we have to cater to the lowest common denominator". Let the
capabilities of your tools be part of your inspiration! Some things are too
cool not to do, and some things get done even if there is no capability to do
them.

------
anamax
> What do you think?

I think that some are too concerned with these things and/or think that
they're "owed" something that they're not. (Many in the latter group know why
their comment was downvoted and an interesting fraction of them are just
looking for an opportunity to argue that the downvote was undeserved.)

Downvotes mean that someone didn't like your comment. Be grateful for that -
in the real world, people silently put the asshole label next to your name.
Sometimes it's you and sometimes it's them. Only one of those is under your
control.

------
RiderOfGiraffes
I like it, but I'd want to think a lot more about the way it feels, how it
works, and other, perhaps unintended, consequences.

I've mused about this recently: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=662052>

------
ShabbyDoo
This scheme would also force those moderating to think enough about their
reasons to choose a tag. I am annoyed when I am down-modded for an unpopular
argument that adds to the discussion that was seemingly selected for its
editorial content rather than its lack of utility. Would someone down-mod me
if they had to either (1) choose a false tag or (2) choose a correct tag like
"Comment does not adhere to my political views on the matter"? Should up-mods
be tagged as well?

------
DTrejo
I like the idea.

It sounds similar to the labels used by Wikipedia which point out problems
with articles (e.g. "This article needs additional citations for
verification").

------
radu_floricica
This is the Slashdot way: each mod has a label (interesting, insightful,
funny, overrated, underrated, troll etc.). A total score can be for example 5
Insightful, made up of 3 Insightful and 2 Interesting.

Slashdot's system is fairly complex, and pretty successful. But on HN the
accent is on fewer members and overall quality, and less on a complex system.
And it's working pretty well so far.

------
vaksel
why worry? I mean seriously chances are your comment will be upvoted. And if
for some stupid reason it gets downvoted, you are only out 8 karma points at
most.

Hardly something that'll ruin you or your overall karma score...and its not
like Karma even does anything, it affects nothing, so even if you get
downvoted, you shouldn't really care.

~~~
russell
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.

~~~
RiderOfGiraffes
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.

~~~
sho
"down-mud"?

~~~
RiderOfGiraffes
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".

------
menloparkbum
_What do you think?_

I think your idea has already been implemented by Slashdot and if you like
seeing labels like "+5, Insightful" you could go participate there, instead.

------
daleharvey
poeple could always you know, reply to the comment?

------
sho
I disagree with further complexity. Generally if people have a good counter to
your argument, and if you seem to be someone worth arguing with, they'll pipe
up with a dissenting view. And if you're really confused, a short reply saying
"I'm genuinely curious as to why I'm being downmodded - anyone care to explain
their decision?" will rarely attract spillover downmods. Unless the comment
was _really_ egregious ..

If we're brainstorming how to improve HN's commenting system, here's an idea:
a limit to upvotes. I propose 32. Beyond that, upvotes only raise position on
the page. Thoughts?

