Mostly by interest on the subject, many times I upvote the headline, without reading the article. If I don't like the article or the link, sometimes I remove the upvote. My heuristic is "I would like this subject discussed on HN ; This subject deserves more exposure"
I seldom upvote (and I can't downvote). Why bother? Can't see whether or not it's had any appreciable effect. Can't see the vote count. I already know other signals are used to determine rankings.
HN makes it hard to read a downvoted comment by dimming it. That has acted as a demotivator for me to downvote a heavily downvoted comment. I upvote them in the hope that I will be able to read them.
Not that this is the same thing, but in case you didn't know you're always able to read comments on HN, even redacted ones, by inspecting the stylesheet. I really like this compromise that they've made.
CTRL+A solves this readability issue easily, but I don't think this (dimming) is the right way treating the comments (HN should just allow sorting like Chronological, most upvoted, basically Reddit sorting since it use reddit tags anyway) and just display everything according user setting. I also don't like flagged comments being collapsed, no matter the reason they are flagged for, anyone/any brigade/bots can hide this way comments they don't like.
Part of what makes HN much better than other online forums is getting deep into comments that challenge opinions on something. Only upvoting things you agree with can lead to a mono-culture like you see in many sub-reddits where opposing views are frequently silenced.
You should re-think your downvote on comments you disagree with. I only downvote comments that don't add to a discussion (or are offensive or stuff like that).
Why? pg himself says downvote on disagreement is fine.
> 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.
I disagree with that and gave you an upvote :). Everything is not an absolute (Kenobi enters: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes"). If someone always downvotes everything they disagree with and only upvotes things they agree with, I think that approach should be re-thought. Maybe someone proves you wrong, points out a perspective that you disagree with but is valid, give them an upvote.
pg's comment is also from 14 years ago before bots invaded nearly every public forum online possibly manipulating votes/likes to promote various things.
I think your comment is interesting even though I disagree, so I upvoted.
It's perhaps important though I didn't state it, that the strength of my impetus to upvote interesting comments or comments that add value to the discussion is stronger than the strength of the impetus to downvote on disagreement, so when the too clash it's an upvote or no action.
So I don't feel like your worry is a practical issue for hoe I use the voting buttons.
After reading these comments, if something is mediocre and I think it's wrong that still seems like a good reason to use downvote on disagreement (where I don't go around downvoting every mediocre comment, though I could see the argument for doing so).
From guidelines: "Anything that good hackers would find interesting."
I always read, or at least skim the story, because most of the time it's clickbait. Sometimes it's really obvious that many people don't read it. There was one with the headline of "Should you trust your gut?" and the story had little to do with guts, but the responses were mostly about guts.
Same here, HN is my bookmarker of “all around interesting pages and opinions”. If I find something interesting that’s not on HN, I post it so it can be bookmarked.
I usually never upvote threads, the same way I forfeit my political right to vote. Maybe it's just autism, but I don't understand why anyone goes voting -do normal people think their vote makes a difference? My one vote will not decide what's on the frontpage and what's not. To be precise: I only see it because it's on the frontpage already and I feel to busy for sifting through new.
Actually, I do not believe the frontpage is organic at all. Sometimes you see uninteresting crap with zero comments entering the frontpage, leaving it with... zero or just a few comments.
I do sometimes upvote high quality comments and I try to actively downvote and flag spam, which is rare. And I generally upvote people responding to me (unless it's a negative response, which gets a downvote) to encourage giving me responses, as I like to engage.
upvotes for comments: if it has an interesting new angle / perspective relating to the story, threads of people arguing about something interesting and bringing up novel points.
downvotes: mostly people doing single line comments, especially on subjects touching 'politics' if they are just repeating common talking points/one-liners.
If the subject and content are very good or inspirational, or funny, basically if I appreciate the article, I will upvote. I don’t upvote all mind, I believe I comment and don’t upvote, not sure what drives the rank, in the list, comments and or upvote / timing. Am not actually concerned with the ranking, same with articles, I’m far more often interested in the comments than the actual article
I upvote to add the article to my “Read Later” collection. This also means the article is either interesting or might be useful to get back to when I have more time.
For stories, I usually read them first unless it’s clearly something I already know the story behind and want to boost.
In comments, I (try) to use it for things I feel add to the conversation and should be seen even when I don’t agree. I can admit they sometimes get the other vote though when they get my goat.
If I feel like my life has been made better by the comment/link, I upvote.
If the comment/link is not actionable, and/or results in wasting time or my life worsening, or encourages social problems, especially a breakdown in communication (such as baseless emotional appeals or polarizing comments), I downvote.
I go straight to comments normally and if those are insightful and interesting i upvote the story. Hardly ever read the article; unintended usually but the article said enough.
If I see a story that has been made dead or flagged that I think should not be I vouch for it and then upvote it.
If I post something then I am on new page, then I quickly look over page for things I think are high quality in something I am familiar with, then I upvote. Even though, realistically this makes my current submission less likely to get to front because i am upvoting its competitors.
Usually to counter negative voted posts that aren't actually negative, just some people not agreeing with the content, but factually accurate.
Rarely when I believe that a post was very well written and I couldn't have said it better.
I upvote interesting articles and comments that provide new insight, regardless of whether or not I agree with the perspective.
I only downvote comments that provide no insight whatsoever, while insulting, like "so you think that <insert opinion>... yeah, I can see why you're <insert insult>", or one-liners like "you're wrong" that only assert their incorrectness without saying why.
97 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 163 ms ] threadSometimes this happens also to me, but then I read the article and if it’s a “scam” I remove the upvote.
Generally speaking, I upvote a story when I found it interesting, I learn something new, or the story made me think.
Favourite: When I want to save a story for myself
If it's something I've read and I want save it for later, I also upvote it.
If I didn't read it before and it's upvote worthy, then I upvote.
If it's something I'd like to see discussed on HN, I upvote.
Tldr: only if I've read it
- stories: I think this is interesting
- comments: I think this is interesting and/or I agree with this
Downvote:
- stories: I don't think this is interesting
- comments: I disagree with this comment or don't think it adds anything
You should re-think your downvote on comments you disagree with. I only downvote comments that don't add to a discussion (or are offensive or stuff like that).
> 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.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171
pg's comment is also from 14 years ago before bots invaded nearly every public forum online possibly manipulating votes/likes to promote various things.
I think it's a recipe for an echo chamber, and imho HN works only because some users ignore his take on this.
It's perhaps important though I didn't state it, that the strength of my impetus to upvote interesting comments or comments that add value to the discussion is stronger than the strength of the impetus to downvote on disagreement, so when the too clash it's an upvote or no action.
So I don't feel like your worry is a practical issue for hoe I use the voting buttons.
After reading these comments, if something is mediocre and I think it's wrong that still seems like a good reason to use downvote on disagreement (where I don't go around downvoting every mediocre comment, though I could see the argument for doing so).
I always read, or at least skim the story, because most of the time it's clickbait. Sometimes it's really obvious that many people don't read it. There was one with the headline of "Should you trust your gut?" and the story had little to do with guts, but the responses were mostly about guts.
Actually, I do not believe the frontpage is organic at all. Sometimes you see uninteresting crap with zero comments entering the frontpage, leaving it with... zero or just a few comments.
I do sometimes upvote high quality comments and I try to actively downvote and flag spam, which is rare. And I generally upvote people responding to me (unless it's a negative response, which gets a downvote) to encourage giving me responses, as I like to engage.
I think it might contribute more than you think, looking at how many points the rising articles have. Especially if your one vote is an early vote.
I upvote any reply to my comments.
upvotes for comments: if it has an interesting new angle / perspective relating to the story, threads of people arguing about something interesting and bringing up novel points.
downvotes: mostly people doing single line comments, especially on subjects touching 'politics' if they are just repeating common talking points/one-liners.
In comments, I (try) to use it for things I feel add to the conversation and should be seen even when I don’t agree. I can admit they sometimes get the other vote though when they get my goat.
If the comment/link is not actionable, and/or results in wasting time or my life worsening, or encourages social problems, especially a breakdown in communication (such as baseless emotional appeals or polarizing comments), I downvote.
"Never read the comments!" is my general guideline, unless I want to know what people are saying.
If I post something then I am on new page, then I quickly look over page for things I think are high quality in something I am familiar with, then I upvote. Even though, realistically this makes my current submission less likely to get to front because i am upvoting its competitors.
I only downvote comments that provide no insight whatsoever, while insulting, like "so you think that <insert opinion>... yeah, I can see why you're <insert insult>", or one-liners like "you're wrong" that only assert their incorrectness without saying why.