That gives me an idea. Given enough data, might it be possible to create a system that automatically identify "sides" to a controversial discussion based solely on how people are voting, and adjusts the sorting algorithm appropriately to counteract groupthink?
For example, if a group of people who tend to vote the same way on certain things all downvote a particular comment, but a smaller group of people with a different voting history vote a different way on the same comment, the system could mark that comment as a minority opinion rather than simply a "bad comment" and give less weight to downvotes from users of the opposing position when sorting that comment.
I know what you're saying, but for some reason it makes me uneasy. I guess because anything trying to categorise people as either X or Y is fundamentally tribal.
The HN readers are good at moderation overall, not perfect but definitely good. Maybe it would be enough to have an "agree/disagree" button as well as a "good/bad" button.
Re:I Downvoted Because
by names_are_hard on Wednesday January 13, 2021 @11:54AM
(#25764658)
That's a great idea. Made me think of Amazon, I think, that categorized reviews and highlighted the top positive and top negative views. So combining your idea with your parent's, HN could determine the "sides" and highlight the most upvoted of each as top comments.
In the perfect world, I'd come to HN and the top 2 voted comments would be the most succinct and well argued sides to the discussion (assuming there's a traditional for+against), then the top voted comments the tier down would be the best refutations of those points. That way I can read both and get to my own balanced view quicker. If all the voting system tells me is "this is what the average HN reader agrees with" that's far less valuable.