News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Welcome to HN. Please, read 'Hacker News Guidelines.' We... by nkurz on Saturday December 05, 2009 @01:17PM (#978341)
Can I add a suggest adding something about comment moderation to the Guidelines? Perhaps:

"Don't downmod comments just because you disagree with them. Similarly, don't upmod a comment just because it takes your side. Instead, vote up for comments that further the discussion, and down for comments that do not."

Re:Welcome to HN. Please, read 'Hacker News Guidelines.' We... by tokenadult on Saturday December 05, 2009 @03:16PM (#978546)
Don't downmod comments just because you disagree with them.

This is a legitimate and rather frequently made suggestion, but a contrary suggestion was made in a comment by pg

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171

where he wrote, "I think it's ok to use the up and down arrows to express agreement. Obviously the uparrows aren't only for applauding politeness, so it seems reasonable that the downarrows aren't only for booing rudeness."

On some threads, I can find occasion (as I do here) to post a reply indicating substantive, polite disagreement with a previous comment, to which I reply with my disagreement. On some other threads, I see comments to which it would not be good use of time to post a disagreeing reply, and sometimes in those cases (not all the time), I find it most appropriate to downvote to indicate disagreement. I can tell that I am not alone in that practice.

What I especially like to do is to upvote any comment that is good, where "good" is defined as helps me learn something I didn't know or makes me think from a new point of view. People can disagree with positions I hold and still get upvotes from me, especially if they post verifiable information indicating why they hold the positions they hold.

Re:Welcome to HN. Please, read 'Hacker News Guidelines.' We... by nkurz on Saturday December 05, 2009 @03:57PM (#978609)
I've seen Paul's comment before, and have now voted it up. Still, I don't think encouraging voting based on agreement is a good thing. Yes, given limited channels of communication, sometimes voting up a comment you like is the best way to show solidarity. If in the long run this produces a better forum for discussion, then great!

I'm fairly happy with where the quality of discussion is now, and I'd like to see it continue at the same or better level. I think a guideline that encourages conscious and non-reflexive voting based on quality rather than agreement would help, even if the other only difference is that people think more about why they are voting as they currently do.

Re:Welcome to HN. Please, read 'Hacker News Guidelines.' We... by dpcan on Saturday December 05, 2009 @01:22PM (#978348)
Usually it's the comments I agree with that I want to see discussed more.
Re:Welcome to HN. Please, read 'Hacker News Guidelines.' We... by nkurz on Saturday December 05, 2009 @01:30PM (#978361)
OK, feel free to reword it to "upvote the comments you want to see discussed more". My main thrust is that an explicit guideline should be given for comment moderation, not what the exact content should be.
Re:Welcome to HN. Please, read 'Hacker News Guidelines.' We... by billswift on Sunday December 06, 2009 @09:28AM (#979554)
Usually it's comments I disagree with that I want to see discussed more. It's where someone else disagrees with you that you are most likely to identify mistakes in your own reasoning. Reading things you agree with can make you feel all warm and fuzzy, but you won't learn much from them.