Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> If downvotes don't matter

Votes don't matter. Upvotes, downvotes, they're just fake internet points, they don't mean anything. Don't sweat it.

Some of my most upvoted posts/comments in various fora over the web have been quick low-effort in-joke references, or throwaway gags, whereas my carefully nuanced and referenced technical explanations have got a handful of upvotes. They're totally arbitrary, and the crowd is fickle.

Downvotes are of even less consquence.

Write good posts/comments. Be kind. Be useful. If the stuff you write gets downvoted, that's just the way it works out sometimes. Even if it gets downvoted into total oblivion, that doesn't mean that no-one read it or was helped by it. You might still have made a worthwhile contribution to someone's day. Let it go, and keep writing kind and useful things.



> Upvotes, downvotes, they're just fake internet points, they don't mean anything.

I think this should be true to individuals, in regards to the ownership they feel over their online account and the content they create.

But I do not think this is (or should be) true in regards to an online community. Because I think sites like Hacker News and Ars Technica have relatively healthy comment ecosystems, where the content of the comments is valuable and contributes immensely to the store of knowledge these sites contain.

(Notably, Ars Technica has a more obvious, perceivable liberal political bias which I happen to agree with, so I'm sure the value of that community is divided, whereas I think Hacker News is more politically balanced.)


Some of my most upvoted posts/comments in various fora over the web have been quick low-effort in-joke references, or throwaway gags, whereas my carefully nuanced and referenced technical explanations have got a handful of upvotes. They're totally arbitrary, and the crowd is fickle.

This is one of the more frustrating parts of the whole thing. I try not to care much about votes, but when a "throwaway comment" gets 50+ upvotes, while a carefully thought out, heavily researched, link/citation supported post with a lot of "meat" to it gets no votes at all, or even a downvote... that's just kind of grating in some sense. Well, it is to me anyway.


But _why_ does it feel kind of grating? Why does it frustate you? Again -- votes don't matter. I absolutely love the parent post for making it so plain.

Moreover, why do you only care about the downvotes? Why don't upvotes bother you? Something to think about :)


Again -- votes don't matter. I absolutely love the parent post for making it so plain.

The parent post made an assertion, but did not really justify that assertion. Sure, it's easy to say that in some abstract sense "down votes don't matter". I believe that myself, in that sort of abstract / hand-wavy sense. But real life experience shows us that down votes do matter to people - at least some people, some times, in some situations. Why? I'm not a psychologist, so I'm not going to pretend to understand the deeper aspects of that. But it seems self evident to me that it's related to the other evolved responses we humans have, related to peer approval, social status, recognition, embarrassment, etc.

But _why_ does it feel kind of grating? Why does it frustate you?

In the specific case I mentioned, I think it's largely about the mismatch between expectations and perceived subjective sense of "right/wrong" and reality. I expect random throwaway comments that just say "taxation is theft" to get downvoted. But when I spend 30 minutes doing research, looking up citations, and crafting a carefully composed response to something, to try to make a point or provide a useful reference to help somebody and then that gets down voted, it triggers that instinctive "unfairness reaction" that we have. Or that's my approximate theory anyway.

Moreover, why do you only care about the downvotes?

I think because a downvote is a form of disapproval, and it's done in public, and it correlates to our desire to avoid being shamed / embarrassed, especially in front of others.


I appreciate your response, even if my question was perhaps 50% rhetorical.

Of course I can understand the psychological part of it, but that's what I contest here.

You write an insightful message in a forum. Perhaps 5,000 people read it, 100 upvote it, 200 downvote it, and let's say that 5 reply with disagreement or trolling.

So in the end you find yourself frustrated with the 100 downvotes and the 5 trolls. It's irrational.

I can understand how people who profit from likes, upvotes and comments in forums and social media can care about their "Internet points". But for an individual person to care if their post has any kind of vote or to track the number of likes, sorry, I don't think that rationalizing it is any beneficial, productive, sensical.


I agree that it's irrational for the most part. But even understanding that on a cerebral level still doesn't stop it from being slightly annoying / frustrating / whatever at times. The vagaries of human nature, I guess...


Downvotes matter because they often tie into visibility. On HN, a few downvotes make the post fade out so it is difficult to read. On Reddit, two downvotes collapse a post so that its text becomes hidden.

This means on these platforms downvotes are a weaponised tool wielded by someone who can destroy the effort that went into post with but a mouse click.


Then such forums where your posts can be manipulated so easily are a lost cause, and there's no point in getting frustrated about them.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: