Ask HN: How Should We Treat Each Other Here?
Humor is a strange animal on-line, especially in the hacker world. What would obviously be a joke in person can easily be interpreted differently in writing. I have often resorted to using <sarcasm> and </sarcasm> tags, but sometimes forget. Also, hacker humor has an even higher standard. There's a fine line here; too subtle: nobody "gets" it, too obvious: take it to reddit where it belongs. But humor does have its place here. Some of my favorite comments have made me ruin keyboards when I read them while drinking.
I often joke that I feel like I'm in jail working in a cubible in someone else's office instead of my own company, a common theme here. So my response to the "accounting vs. jail" post was 3 words: "What's the difference?" Interesting things happened. In the first half hour, it got 6 up-votes. I imagined fellow hackers in the same situation getting a chuckle. Then I got this response from kyro:
"Your childish, baseless, and condescending comment is actually quite offensive. You'd think someone as old as yourself would know that there's more to life than a job. And you'd think these types of garbage comments wouldn't get upvoted. To be honest, it's not even that witty."
Ouch.
I have a personal rule to not respond to something like that for 24 hours. So I just said something like, "Lighten up," and forgot about it.
24 hours later, I haven't forgetten. kyro, would you have said that to me in person? If not, then please don't say it here. I have bumped into about 25 fellow hn'ers at various events, and couldn't wait to meet them in person. Now I wonder what I'd say if I bumped into kyro (whoever that is) at an event.
I once made the mistake of referring to someone on-line (OP, not a poster here) as a pussy. Big mistake. I still think he was a pussy (he talked about how he needed drugs to make it through school), but I never should had said it. You guys straighened me out in a hurry.
I would suggest everyone remember the site guidelines, which are basically the same as in any kindergarten. Don't say something you wouldn't say in person. If you downvote, add a comment (why?) And most of all, treat others how you would like to be treated. With so much talk about, bits, bytes, and dollars, it's easy to forget that it's always people first.
Oh, and if you have a smarta$$ remark, go for it, but make it clever. After another 300 lines of code, I could use the respite.
83 comments
[ 24.1 ms ] story [ 242 ms ] threadPost something.
See how people react.
Fine-tune your communications strategy.
Repeat.
---
You're correct in that there seems to be a fairly fine line here between "humor" and "useless post". I think part of this comes from the fact that we've all been online for more than a minute and have already seen/heard most of the standard comments and jokes. If you can come up with a uniquely humorous post that is also on-topic and enlightening on some level, most people will appreciate it.
Timing can also be important. I didn't see your "What's the difference" post. But, if that was an early comment at the top-level, it could be regarded as useless. If it was a response 8 levels deep to a heated argument where people are starting to split hairs, and you step in with something that can cause people to take a step back and actually see the forest, it can sometimes go over well.
Basically you'll start writing what people want to hear, instead of what you believe.
This is the main culture problem at many social bookmarking sites - whichever group was first basically "locks" the mindset, and no changes are accepted (at least not without massive co-ordination of some other group that wants to take over).
It's important to never downmod (and upmod) based on whether or not you agree with the subject!
People seem to do the right thing here, but mainly:
upmod posts that bring something new to the discussion, whether or not they are correct, and whether or not you agree with them.
Downmod spam and useless junk.
Downmod incorrect items (but only those that don't add something new, for example that don't clarify a common misconception or error) to -1 (but no lower).
Leave the rest alone.
I would find this very difficult for a post that [I felt] was not correct (and not interesting), even if it was a viewpoint which hadn't been mentioned yet in such a thread.
Accepting feedback for your style and manner, will help you get the substance of your argument across.
To the contrary, I think it's possible to disagree factually with someone without being time-wastingly snarky or shallow or cliche. (I hope this comment proves to be an example of what I claim.) I got downmodded once, badly, for a comment that consisted of thanks to a submitter for submitting a post. But probably because I wrote "LOL" as the first sentence of the comment (I really had laughed out loud at the post, which was a serious post about an industry news item), and didn't add any additional information or thoughtful discussion, my comment was deemed a Reddit-style comment and voted down ruthlessly. Now if I just agree with a submission or a comment as a good contribution to HN, but have nothing further to say, I upvote. If I disagree (as here), I express my disagreement in what I hope is polite language. The feedback loop functions mostly by training us about MANNER of submissions and comments. I think I'm still able to take a controversial point of view, as long as I don't inject flaming and back up my factual statements. And I strongly appreciate comments back to me of the nature of "Could you please provide evidence for your claim?" and post comments of a similar nature to other participants here.
It's important to never downmod (and upmod) based on whether or not you agree with the subject!
The founder of the site, pg, has expressed disagreement with this idea in a public comment, although I don't have the reference at hand. Sometimes downmodding to show factual disagreement is the most efficient treatment for a comment that mostly expresses a wrong opinion with little sign that the commenter will be willing to bring forth evidence, or with an existing reply-to-reply comment showing that the commenter doesn't think evidence is an issue he should concern himself with.
Sure, I've said some silly things that I meant completely in a light-hearted way to only be down-voted into oblivion or offend someone else. You just take it as an experience and move on.
I understand you have a metric ton of karma and are probably not getting used to being down-voted or garnering negative comments, but it happens. People are different and will reply uniquely to off-center comments.
The people here believe they are smart. Some are correct, others are not.
But at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter to me what people on here think of themselves and others as long they can articulate their opinions in an intelligent and reasonable manner.
Indeed, just as being right doesn't mean they are smart - but the point I'm making is that HN users cover a range of cleverness, and that self-estimation is pointless (Dunning-Kroger syndrome). Saying "only joke if you're clever" is all but identical to saying "anyone can joke".
Regarding the humor stuff, I just worry that the reddit style 250 comment pun threads will start becoming more and more accepted here; however, I wouldn't say it's a very large concern. I just bet that a lot of people have similar worries about quality here.
other times we joke just to be part of the conversation. like i would have nothing substantial to say about training squids to do things, but hey i would certainly point out the hentai moment.
anyone can certainly tailor their behavior on here to gain karma and acceptance, but i am of the mind that it is much more interesting for people to be themselves and see what happens, consequences and all
Everyone thinks what they are doing is right, and "what is the difference?", although it may not look offensive, could have been the most hurtful 3-4 words he heard this week.
His reply was probably as inappropriate as you bringing back "The pussy" and hurt him again since you "think he still is a pussy".
Use the <sarcasm> tags. Explain your jokes. Make sure somebody who isn't paying any attention at all to your comment will recognize it as a joke. Even then you'll probably lose half of the audience.
And don't respond when some person misunderstands it. Half the time you'll just dig the hole deeper.
I'm still torn with whether to respond or not. If the person replying obviously hasn't read it, or if it is obvious on re-reading my comment that most people would understand it, I don't.
But if the person is really confused, I hate to leave somebody wondering. So I am very tempted to reply.
It's just -- tough to do.
That seems to be what kyro did. A one liner simply doesn't add much to the conversation - as you said, it's a fine line.
He seems to have been overly critical and could have reigned it in a bit (no need for "childish, baseless", etc.). Points on both sides.
Seems to boil down to this: Post thoughtfully, and critique kindly. Easy enough.
You can remember that the most important rule of comedy is timing or incorporate the rule of 3 -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_three_(writing). Also if you have to flag your joke as sarcasm or a joke then you should put a little more effort into.
------------------
"Oh, and if you have a smarta$$ remark, go for it, but make it clever. After another 300 lines of code, I could use the respite."
Only 300 lines of code and then you need a break, kyro is right you are OLD.
I was going to go with the pussy comment but because I don't know you; so I will leave that until I do. Consider this our introduction ;)
Plus using the OLD comment allowed me to bring in the other person as someone who seconds that.
Old enough to know how to get something done with 300 lines of code when so many others need 1000 or more.
Not responding to something like that for 24 hours (or even just ten minutes) is a great idea. Off-the-cuff reactions are often pretty defensive. If you have an articulate counter-argument, that's different, of course.
Also, as a general rule, it's probably worth trying to avoid being snide. In purely written conversations, it's easy enough to read criticism into comments that are just too terse, and you're responding to another person, not a text box. Be respectful, regardless of how you feel about their ideas. (I tend to edit my comments quite a bit. Often, on re-reading, I realize that my attempt at being concise made me sound like a dick instead.)
My thought on this exactly. When in doubt, elaborate.
There are many times I come up with something I think is fairly clever to say, but I'll resist saying it unless I can find something genuinely useful to say as well. Sure, my fellow HNers might have to miss out on all my wit and charm, but at least if the joke flops, the (hopefully) relevant comment that follows might redeem it a bit.
In this particular situation, I think the reaction would have been much different if "What's the difference?" was followed by roughly the same explanation of your line of thinking as posted here...
As for kyro's remark, while it strikes me as a bit trigger happy, it doesn't seem particularly insulting. If anything, I'm curious how he extrapolated "childish, baseless, and condescending" out of three relatively innocuous words. It seems like you'd have to write more words to be all three of those things.
Anyway, not like anyone actually cares about my view on this, but I can't resist the opportunity to go all meta every once in a while.
I have downvoted quite a lot of "smart$$" comments but never something that added original thought. I come to HN for comments that educate, inform and make me think. If i wanted a good laugh I would go to bash.org
I understand the situation. People need to chill out. If you've got some beef with another user, just contact them personally.
I, like you, just want to read interesting things. Maybe there should be a sticky thing like in other forums for personal conduct expectations.
People are here in good part for the high S/N. Humor is much appreciated, but only when it doesn't start to materially impact S/N.
Too much navel gazing is also frowned on; self-analysis becomes N rather than S.
The personal connection that develops to the site has a significant foothold in the respect that the members exhibit, as demonstrated in the high S/N.
Just to be clear: I don't mean this comment to be a criticism, in case it comes across that way. And I'm not saying my S is particularly high. This is all stuff that others have said; there have been some very interesting conversations regarding what makes HN special. It is simply my take, and distillation, and a simple mental framework I use for myself when participating.
Finally, I'll add that my response is not particularly personally directed, but is made instead for and to the overall thread.
>> "kyro, would you have said that to me in person?"
I don't think the whole "What you say in person" test is useful. If someone tells you an offensive joke in person, you might politely laugh. If someone tells you an offensive joke on the net, you'll probably call it out as being offensive. Some people would have been offended by your original joke (accountants for one).
I too enjoy the humorous comments though.
>> "Oh, and if you have a smarta$$ remark, go for it, but make it clever."
Sorry, but IMHO your original joke comment wasn't clever. It was just easy. Better luck next time ;)
>> "24 hours later, I haven't forgetten"
It was just a joke some people didn't rate. Not life or death :/
--Larry Wall
To wit, try not to be offensive and at the same time try not to be offended.
Trying not to be offensive is a skill. I think just trying to be aware of it is a good way to practice it. Trying to not be offended is harder, but when I've used the "how to disagree" approach, of examining the facts presented (minus the imaginings, opinion, connotations, tone, attitude etc), and replying to them only (also in a factual way), it has been very effective, and also seemed to somehow close it off, and I didn't feel offended anymore.
It's a pity this article is dead, because I think the issue you raise is a very interesting one. Not specific to Hackernews, but more as a "how are we to live" philosophical question, and a very intellectually stimulating one.
Personally, I find most of the ones posted here hilarious- however, they're also usually downvoted into the basement. That discourages people from posting more, which encourages a more serious discussion. People still post jokes, but the downvoting discourages joke threads and a more reddit like atmosphere. This duality manages to maintain awesome and funny comments while discourages them from being rampant.
It's a good mix.
"I never should should have said it, whether I still believe it to be true or not" might have been better, but I think it's presumptive to assign it to insincerity.
You could say the same for "smacks of x" being proceeded by the word "respectfully" - why say "smacks of" with its derisory connotations, when you could say "seems"?
(The second was just a instantly-typed reaction which should have been an edit. Much grovellings to all for replying by mistake.)
Honestly, it's an annoying post, and it would be an annoying edit. "OMG WHY ARE PEOPLE DOWNMODDING ME?!" is just really annoying no matter where you put it.
Think about it. How could it possibly inform anyone of anything? "Oh, I never would have noticed that that comment was being down voted if its poster hadn't pointed it out."
Young adults mainly, median of 23 seems about right.
#startups
I'd hope that if I offended someone on here, they'd just grab me on IRC and chat, rather than post a lengthly writeup :/
- whatever the topic at hand is, I haven't thought about it enough yet.
- my attempts at humor will not come across in text (without context).
- the person I'm corresponding with is smarter than I am.
- Despite my best efforts, I will be misunderstood.
One of the best quotes I've seen on this topic is from Mark Dominus: "Advice to people wishing to become smarter: Get in the habit of assuming that everything is more complex than you imagine."
I think this probably applies to humor as well.
[edit: formatting]
To give an example, if you met Kyro at a convention or event, and he was an informative, insightful guy who happens to not like talking about his work in prison terms, then that's his opinion.
Making a whole QQ post about it on HN is just a little childish... now, I'm brand spanking new to HN, but if this is the kind of thing that goes on here, I won't be on HN for long.
Stick around and speak up from time to time. We can always use another voice. But don't threaten to leave; no one cares.
The problem as so many people have pointed out and I agree with is that funny comments at the root aren't intellectually valuable. One of the problems with making funny comments at root (beyond that they are just useless) is that I think people like me don't always read the article before the comments so they don't have much of a context. I can skip a thread by jumping to the next root comment if the thread is uninteresting, but I can't skip a root comment and they offer more context buildup to make funny remarks in.
Now don't get me wrong I love humor but I think it's better served within the context of slashdot, reddit, digg and so on.