Comment by blowski | Hacker News Reader

Comment by blowski | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I actually agree with what you've written, but I downvoted you because I hate reading comments that say things like "I will probably get some downvotes". If you think you're going to be downvoted, ask yourself why and consider rewriting it in such a way that people won't downvote you.

For example, in your comment here, to make it less downvotable you could say:

* What do you like about the redesign? There must be something positive you can say, even if it's just "it definitely looks more visually appealing" or "I understand that you were trying to improve usability by putting more information on the same side".

* Do you have any evidence that supports your counter-argument? If not, you're just two people with opinions, and since you're not a well-known authority on usability it's just noise.

* What would you suggest doing to fix the problems you've said here while also fixing the problems that the OP identified? Or do you not agree that those problems are really problems?

> If you think you're going to be downvoted, ask yourself why and consider rewriting it in such a way that people won't downvote you.

I don't think intentionally trying to write in a way that doesn't provoke downvotes is helpful to a healthy discussion.

The post in question was direct, that's it.

While it is fair to suggest that the parent post highlight the positives, I don't think it is necessary always. Especially in light of 45 hearts on the medium post in support of the word. I'd say your last two points were addressed in the post as well...

> The post in question was direct, that's it.

So it shouldn't have mentioned voting at all.

I agree with you that avoiding downvotes doesn't promote healthy discussion. However, I take exception to someone pre-empting downvotes - to me personally, it comes across as a challenge to disagree and I don't think that's helpful to a healthy discussion either.

If someone writes something without thinking about whether they'll be upvoted or downvoted, then that's great, even if I disagree with them. But writing with the explicit assumption that you'll be downvoted suggests that you're being contrarian.

I understand much better now with your clarification, thanks

Fact of the matter is that websites like this breed hivemind behavior. The behavior may only be on a per thread basis, but when people see a lot of upvotes and positive praise, the natural response to a challenging post seems to be, "You're just going against the grain. Stop being an asshole." This is also true for comments that get downvoted.

As an example, I had a post where I said the concept of payday loans is not a bad one while simultaneously denouncing the predatory practices that payday loan companies employ. You borrow a small money for 15 days, pay back the loan plus 20% ($200 + 20% in fees and interest = $240), and call it a day. All it took was one post to say that I'm siding with the payday loan companies. The highest I saw was +3. It's currently sitting at -7. I think prefacing the post would have helped the vote count.

Prefacing a post acknowledging possible downvotes is a forewarning to readers that the poster is going against the grain - contrarian if you will - but not in way that's purely devil's advocate. It says to me, "I know what I'm about to say disagrees with you guys, but please hear me out." It's probably not the most eloquent way to express that idea. I have never seen it as a challenge though.

I downvoted you because your comment adds nothing of value and is simply a long-winded "I didn't like your comment because reasons."

I would downvote my own comment if I could.

Serving justice one downvote at a time!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com