Poll: Have you ever clicked the wrong upvote/downvote arrow?
Edit: I propose adding the following to HN's stylesheet:
a:hover img {opacity: .5;}
a[href*=dir\=up] {-webkit-tap-highlight-color: #8ae58a;}
a[href*=dir\=down] {-webkit-tap-highlight-color: #e58a8a;}
Screenshot: http://i.imgur.com/O3Mm7.png
85 comments
[ 4.9 ms ] story [ 178 ms ] thread(joking ;))
People can stand by their point or concede that they were wrong somehow.
If your opinion does a 180, it's probably for the better that your - new - opinion doesn't count.
As a side though, if somebody keeps changing opinions on a given topic, it would be somewhat sensible to lower the effect of such votes.
The ability to change opinions is an important difference between rational and overly stubborn people.
Sometimes I can be convinced during a discussion. Then people are often very surprised that I change my opinion at all. Then I wonder why the bother to discuss, if they don't expect me to actually change my opinion.
An alternative is to have the arrows straddle the top line of a comment instead. The down-vote button will be right beside the 'flag' link which may or may not have a desired side effect.
Yet another idea with possibly least side effect is to have them straddle '[x] points'.
I think adding a hover effect to the arrow would provide the most benefit per second coding. The following line of CSS can do it without requiring image editing:
That gives a little feedback about what irrevocable action is about to take place – which is especially useful when mousing the area in between the arrows, where currently a single pixel of movement can invisibly turn an intended upvote into a downvote.Other solutions are better, but this is an easy 80% one.
Every comment has to have at least 1 line of text, why not make the arrows go from the top of the user line to the bottom of the first comment text line. That is about a 25% increase in size.
(edit) Having actually thought about it for a minute, I think a simple "Undo last vote" in the title bar next to the account name would work just fine for reversing accidental votes. And, say, call it unvote for brevity. I really like how clicking on either arrow makes them disappear, this is very much in line with general minimalistic design of the site, so I would rather have it stay.
http://i53.tinypic.com/24dljeq.png
EDIT (example): http://dave-gallagher.net/pics/hnVote.gif
I'm seconding that suggestion. It's the minimal possible coding workload, and solves the problem instantly for all time.
I've probably clicked two or three wrong arrows out of thousands of clicks, which makes it pretty much a non-issue.
Other than your emotional state, I don't see a huge win here.
Again, in the grand scheme of things one up vote or down vote is relatively unimportant.
edit: Also, I kicked off the downvoting when you were on 1 point, as an experiment. I wonder if the other 3 people who downvoted to get you to -3 would have done so if I hadn't initially put you at 0. Also, clearly three other people upvoted you. If I hadn't put you at 0 and then 3 others followed my lead, would you now be at +4?
It makes a big difference in the perception of opinion. Simply by initially putting you at 0, I was able to make it seem as though your opinion was worth less than mine. The difference between a +8 comment and a +1 (or -3) comment is much larger than the difference between a +8 and a +4.
Peace.
Of course, something might as well be done to prevent it entirely. It's weird how I get a hover icon on what is supposed to be the void between the upvote and downvote arrows.
I have accidentally clicked the wrong arrow several times. I can remember I wished if I can fix my mistake each time.
Ex: [up] [down] x points by username 17 hours ago | link
Instead of:
[u] x points by username 17 hours ago | link
[d]
Perhaps an additional "are you sure" popup after a downvote would serve the purpose. From there, instead of downvoting spam, we could use a flag button.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171
Yes, I am aware that pg and other long-time curators of this site are still thinking about ways to refine the user interface. I personally, having observed many online discussion sites with many kinds of interfaces, think that active curation of the community members (including participant bans) is more important than the specific details of technology for commenting or karma voting. On some sites, administrators lack the spine to use their mops to clean up the mess.
http://lesswrong.com/lw/c1/wellkept_gardens_die_by_pacifism/
There has been consideration of using more flagging and less downvoting for certain kinds of posts, and I'd be happy to see what management here comes up with by way of experiments with new interfaces.
Why? Because I don't think it's necessary, and I find more value in promoting value, than trying to tear down something that I disagree with.
I believe that making it easier to lose Karma than to gain it is counter-productive, and will lead to bashful expression. In other words, that downvoting exists, without the necessity to back up said downvote, leads to a feeling that you can't openly express yourself, which is why we see comments like "I'm probably going to get downvoted for this, but..."
I downvoted you because I disagree with you. Is that the kind of note, you'd like to see clutter up comment threads?
Lots of little notes about why various readers downvoted various comments would be a net loss for the reader. Also, I don't see a reason why downvotes should require any more justification than upvotes. If people hardly ever downvote, then the way to get a lot of karma is to write a lot of comments. If there's anything the internet provides more than enough of it's volume. I'd gladly sacrifice half the commenting volume in exchange for higher comment quality, but an upvote-only system gets the opposite.
Worse still, if downvotes are rare, then many of the top comments will be those that are particularly controversial or divisive since readers who agree will upvote, but many who disagree just don't feel like taking the time to write a note or counterpoint. In the long run, a mostly upvote system will lead to more inside jokes, more inane internet memes and more loud but poorly reasoned assertions.
I could care about the "I downvoted you because I disagree with you" part. I'm more interested in what you said next. And even though I disagree with what you said, I don't feel the need to downvote you to say that. That's what discussion is for.
Second, you downvoted me when I was already in the positive, and I find that less aggravating than downvoting to the negative, which reduces readability of a comment, and reduces the opportunity for dialogue.
I find that the quality of the community makes a much greater difference than the problem of upvotes as you describe it.