Hacker News Reader

feeling somewhat bruised and punished

Let go of that like you drop a filthy sock! Think of it this way: If you never disagree with what others put on the front page, how often are you going to be truly surprised? How often are you going to read something that you didn't know you liked until you clicked on it?

I like to think that a certain number of articles I detest is a necessary complement to enjoying a certain number of "Wow, I'd never thought of that" moments on HN.

I hope that perspective helps you shrug off the odd time you get downmobbed for calling out an article that doesn't "gratify your intellectual curiosity."

Thank you for taking the time to reply, and I agree with the points you make. I do expect to be surprised occasionally by the articles that make the front page. I do expect there to be articles I hate, and continue to hate after reading them, and I do expect that there are articles for which I change my mind and learn something.

What I didn't expect was for people to down-mod me heavily simply for expressing an opinion that was different to theirs. I thought people would ignore or reply. I have always regarded down-modding as reserved for things that don't belong here, and I thought legitimate questioning does belong here.

Clearly I was wrong. The conclusion is that people down-mud me purely because they disagreed, and couldn't be bothered to articulate their reasons. That's why I'm disappointed, and feeling set upon.

I had hoped and expected that people would value contributions, even if the opinions expressed differed from their own. I thought the article was a complete waste of time, said so, and honestly asked why people thought otherwise. For that I got hammered.

I'm disappointed.

It won't stop me from reading and contributing, but it has made me stop and reconsider some things. I'll certainly be less open and more wary.

I voted your post down because you were rude and condescending. Here's an another (more respectful) way in which you could have written your post:

"I see that this story has a lot of upvotes, but it's not a story that I found particularly interesting. Could someone give me their perspective on why they liked this article?"

You also did what is often done to a large number of articles posted to HN: You asked a variant of "why is this hacker news?!," the answer to which is always the same: "because X number of people found that it gratified their intellectual curiosity and voted it up." It gets old after a while, but I personally wouldn't object to someone repeatedly asking the question as long as they were respectful and truly interested in the response rather than asking it as a way to complain.

Hmm. If you found that rude and condescending - and I don't doubt your word - then I'm rather pleased I didn't write what I first thought, and instead toned it down to what I thought was comparatively constructive. Obviously not by enough.

I'll take your comments on board - thank you for taking the time to explain.

I agree with sounddust (I can't just upvote, because my upvotes aren't registering). Although I personally wasn't offended by your attitude (I've gotten used to people having that attitude on HN), your comment was objectively prejudicial: "even the vaguest bit interesting". Not neutral or impartial, which are ideals of the intellectual gratification you seek here...

My personal response is to reply factually, simply ignoring the tone in a comment, as the guidelines imply (with the "2+2=4" example) - and not to downvote unless it's egregious.

But maybe it's fortunate in the bigger scheme of things that you were downvoted - because of this feedback you got. Each little change improves the site as a whole.

BTW: I was thinking that net 2 downvotes, from 1 to -1 (and now 3 downvotes, to -2) is not indicative of the opinion of the community as a whole ... but given that many people vote to adjust a comment score to where they think it should be, maybe it is representative.

I've up-voted sounddust for you.

I come from a background where the ideas of neutral and impartial are independent of those of intellectual gratification. In mathematics one has strong opinions and can state them clearly, and in reply, people can tell you you're wrong without it being mistaken for a personal attack. I guess I just let that leak over into here - now being in business I usually keep it under wraps.

That's what I meant elsewhere when I said I would be less open. In future I won't be so blunt in my opinions, as am in math, and wrap them more, as I do in business.

We've done this to death I think - I really appreciate the feedback. Thanks.

Thanks! I don't want to prolong the agony - but I'm curious about about "neutral and impartial" vs. "intellectual gratification."

If one's opinions and emotions distort the facts, it is difficult to have intellectual gratification, because one cannot see clearly. To me, intellectual gratification requires absolute honesty, as in science (as Feynman says). In other words, the problem isn't that someone is offended, but that one's own vision is distorted.

Perhaps in mathematics this isn't so important because the mathematics itself is already impartial. :-)

> What I didn't expect was for people to down-mod me heavily simply for expressing an opinion that was different to theirs.

You either need more experience with people or to pay more attention to your experience. And no, hackers aren't different.

> I'll certainly be less open and more wary.

How does that follow?

If you're doing things for praise from other people ....

  >> What I didn't expect was for people to down-mod me
  >> heavily simply for expressing an opinion that was
  >> different to theirs.

  > You either need more experience with people or
  > to pay more attention to your experience.  And
  > no, hackers aren't different.

I've only been here just over a year, and one of the things that really attracted me into staying was the way people tolerated opinions that were different, and discussed them intelligently. It seemed (I could've been wrong, of course) that down-modding was reserved for things that were out of place, rather than diagreed with.

Maybe I was wrong, maybe things have changed. Either way, I've learned something. HN isn't as different as I'd thought or hoped.

  >> I'll certainly be less open and more wary.

  > How does that follow?  If you're doing things
  > for praise from other people ....

I'm not doing things for praise, I'm doing things in the hope that others will find them interesting, and if they disagree, to use them as an opportunity for at least one of us to learn. Clearly that's not the case as much as I remember it being. The community (in as much as there is one) has spoken, and I will be less free with opinions that might be unpopular. If all that happens is that it gets down-mud, no one learns anything.

> I'm not doing things for praise, I'm doing things in the hope that others will find them interesting

Okay

> The community (in as much as there is one) has spoken, and I will be less free with opinions that might be unpopular.

A couple of people is "the community"?

From what I've read, many people vote if they think the current score needs adjusting, and don't otherwise. If that's widespread, then most of those who have read the comment and seen it at -2 feel that it's right.

These things are always statistical, have large margins of error, and cannot be taken as certain, but they are indications.

Anyway, this has been done to death, so I shall leave it alone now. Thanks for your feedback.

I don't find camel case interesting in itself, but the evolution and adoption of the technology of written language is intellectually stimulating to me.

The article suggests that written language used to be read aloud - it was a recording of spoken language rather than directly interpretable in itself: monks had to read it aloud to understand it. A bit like an LP (remember Hofstadter's tortoise character who enjoyed LPs by looking at the groove patterns?) And then, it was found that the eye could recognise words directly, without needing to read aloud (or subvocalize), and that this technology became widely adopted over centuries.

The article discusses europe - I wonder if it was a localized cultural change; whether the greeks and romans already had this technology or if they needed to "read aloud" (I believe they favoured memorizing epic poetry); and of course whether other areas (especially china) had a similar change at a similar time.

There's a tantalizing possibility that it may have been accompanied by biological change, perhaps similar to the bizarre and fascinating concept of "The Bicameral Mind".

Or perhaps my intellectually curiosity is reading too much into the article? If so, the article stimulated it.

EDIT I was sure the guidelines used to say "intellectually stimulating", but you're right, it's "gratifies one's intellectual curiosity" http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html I found the article more intellectually provocative than gratifying, so maybe you're right.

BTW: I've found my upvotes/downvotes on comments aren't working anymore (I need to refresh to see it). Is HN secretly experimenting with vote privileges (karma threshold over 2183? average over 2.68? membership over 304 days?). Is it a bug? Or have I somehow irritated someone powerful?

I'm interested because I want more than half of the people who are currently in high school to know a little bit about programming in ten years, and I wonder what might trip up some of them in an introductory programming course.

I imagine, "What's all this? Why not just write (dwim)?"