News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Tell HN: Disagree ≠ Downvote by Tycho on Monday February 14, 2011 @09:12PM (#2219767)
I disagree. I would downvote any opinion I thought was 'bad for the world' (or whatever), even if it was stated politely, providing it wasn't already in minus karma (that's just mean). If something has 69 upvotes, but just as many people think its wrong, then downvoting lets readers know more accurately how the HN community feels about a certain topic.

Btw I think there is an old pg post sanctioning downvoting for disagreement.

Edit: wouldn't downvote a comment to zero either

Re:Tell HN: Disagree ≠ Downvote by Locke1689 on Monday February 14, 2011 @09:23PM (#2219800)
The OP should double check the HN guidelines (http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html). There is no requirement that downmodding not be for disagreement. HN is not Reddit (which I shouldn't have to tell him because his account is less than a year old ;)) and we do not follow Reddiquette.

FYI, here's PG's comment: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171

Re:Tell HN: Disagree ≠ Downvote by latch on Monday February 14, 2011 @09:40PM (#2219865)
I did re-check the guidelines before posting, but wasn't aware of PG's comments. Thanks.

My preference (and that's really all this is, my preference), as has since been suggested, is that unless the comment is clearly unconstructive/offensensive/antagonizing, people leave a reply along with a downvote (or upvote an existing reply they more strongly agree with).

Re:Tell HN: Disagree ≠ Downvote by lukifer on Monday February 14, 2011 @09:23PM (#2219806)
I disagree with you, and therefore upvoting. ;)

The voting mechanism means whatever the end user wants it to mean. I use a simple metric: did the comment improve, or detract from, the conversation?

Re:Tell HN: Disagree ≠ Downvote by nyellin on Monday February 14, 2011 @09:31PM (#2219837)
I think Tycho would agree. If the comment improved the discussion, it couldn't have been "bad for the world."
Re:Tell HN: Disagree ≠ Downvote by JoeAltmaier on Monday February 14, 2011 @09:40PM (#2219867)
Sometimes provoking a better comment makes a distressing comment useful; therefore upvoteable. Like I upvoted that distressing comment up there.
Re:Tell HN: Disagree ≠ Downvote by noibl on Monday February 14, 2011 @09:39PM (#2219864)
The worst case is downvoting a new comment to zero in order to hide it because you disagree. This is a fragile medium for multi-faceted discourse and that kind of thing is just vandalism.

What's so wrong with the idea of upvoting a post that you intend to rebut if it neatly articulates a reasonable position?

Re:Tell HN: Disagree ≠ Downvote by Tycho on Monday February 14, 2011 @10:07PM (#2219958)
Not everything needs or ought to spark a new discussion. But I would up vote things I disagreed with if they were insightful. Retrodden political soundbites though? Nah
Re:Tell HN: Disagree ≠ Downvote by JoeAltmaier on Monday February 14, 2011 @09:41PM (#2219871)
I always do; I endorse that. Its hypocritical to reply if you don't think the comment is important.
Re:Tell HN: Disagree ≠ Downvote by zachallaun on Monday February 14, 2011 @09:22PM (#2219797)
I don't believe that a downvoted comment more accurately reflects the feelings of HN than an upvoted rebuttal.

You're right that "bad for the world" opinions should likely be downvoted, but I often disagree with comments that are not so without feeling a desire to downvote them.

Re:Tell HN: Disagree ≠ Downvote by aeurielesn on Monday February 14, 2011 @09:28PM (#2219823)
> I don't believe that a downvoted comment more accurately reflects the feelings of HN than an upvoted rebuttal.

People has many times suggested to force a reply when you down vote to counter the emptiness that a lone down vote leaves.

Re:Tell HN: Disagree ≠ Downvote by Tycho on Monday February 14, 2011 @09:33PM (#2219845)
I agree pretty much. I rarely downvote anything, it's a bit unfriendly. But there are times when I strongly disagree but don't want to start a 'someone on the Internet is wrong ' thread.