I do realize this issue has been touched a number of times but I don't believe it has ever been truly addressed.<p>I will go ahead and mention the comparison to reddit because I know it will be brought up. I stopped visiting that site for this very reason. There's nothing more annoying than seeing a legitimate, well-thought-out comment offering perfectly capable intellectual stimulation... downvoted because it doesn't agree with the general population on HN. It's counter-productive to HN's cause (progression, which can't come about without some opposition of current standards)... and every time I see it I lose more and more hope in humanity. I upvote these types of downvoted comments every time I see them. I'm tired of it and I may end up putting HN behind me like I did reddit.<p>So can we please all just come to an understanding and agreement to not downvote comments you don't agree with? And better yet, upvote comments that provide intellectual stimulation even when you disagree with them.
I haven't seen this problem quite so much on Hacker News -- or at least, it's nothing compared to more mainstream sites. On Reddit you can actually watch (particularly on slower sections, like proggit) as single people come into the thread and <i>every</i> <i>single</i> <i>post</i> expressing opinion X loses one point.<p>I don't think it's caused by disagreement <i>per</i> <i>se</i>. I think it's because people (whether they realize it or not) want to promote their opinion on certain topics. An upvoted comment expressing a contrary opinion seems like an endorsement of that opinion by the community (even if it isn't). So they downvote it to try to reduce the appearance of that endorsement, thus promoting their own opinion in its stead.
Most of my downvotes are not solely because I disagree with a particular point of view, but because the opinion presented seems to have been formed because the poster is missing a fundamental fact that is crucial to the opposite point of view.<p>I can't tell if he is ignorant of this fact and would change his view if he knew, or if he holds his opinion despite it. Expressing a contrary opinion requires suitable acknowledgement and refutation of the arguments going in the other direction if it is to have any merit.<p>If such a fact is acknowledged and refuted, then I am happy to upvote.
I think an upvote <i>is</i> basically equivalent to saying 'I concur'. It's not equivalent to a '+' grade.<p>The problem is other people (rightly) have their own opinion about the meaning of an upvote.<p>--<p>I think voting serves a dual purpose; 1) to moderate via community consensus and 2) provide a meta-game designed to entertain members.<p>I don't think voting should be taken too seriously .. in the end - points and karma are just a distraction. I don't think it's worth taking it too seriously.
HN is becoming a victim of its own success. It really needs to be taken to another level so its easier to use. Right now its alot of noise which is increasing on a daily basis because more people are using it and is making it more and more difficult to use. The voting system is just one problem.
What? In the real world, if you say I'm fat, that I should stop eating fast food, and I'm a douche-bag, then that's your opinion.<p>My opinion is that I am am very fit, I have awesome pecs, I can lift a burning car off a pregnant mother etc.<p>;-)
Unfortunately your own post is mostly an opinion and is not providing much intellectual stimulation. If you have any ideas to control opinion-based voting or detect patterns, then that would be more interesting rather than an emotional appeal.