7 ms·
This discussion is a good example of why downvoting, graying comment text, and specifically, downvoting for disagreement, are bad. The solution to the problem
by instantwhat 7y ago
This discussion is a good example of why downvoting, graying comment text, and specifically, downvoting for disagreement, are bad.
The solution to the problem this story is about is robust, fearless discussion in pursuit of truth.
But what I see here are many thoughtful, reasoned comments being shamed and made hard-to-read by people who aren't able or willing to rebut them. It is cowardly and anti-intellectual.
It's effectively the downvoters saying, "I disagree with what you said, therefore I will make it harder for other people to hear you." It's antithetical to the stated purpose of this site: intellectual curiosity.
- GreaterFool 7y agoSo one starts with 1 point. Someone clicks downvote, it goes to 0 and the comment disappears, right? That's too fast IMHO. Perhaps a better system would be to upvote only? Then constructive comments would raise to the top and who really cares what's long way down?
- instantwhat 7y ago> Perhaps a better system would be to upvote only? Then constructive comments would raise to the top and who really cares what's long way down? I agree. That's one of the conclusions I've come to from having used different comment voting systems online. I think tildes.net works that way. But HN specifically has the problem that its founder thinks downvoting for disagreement is good. It mystifies me that someone who ostensibly favors intellectual curiosity has a stated policy which creates a narrow-minded echo chamber (at least, for certain topics).