Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
The Problem of a Lack of Downvoting.
22 points by DarkShikari on Oct 1, 2008 | hide | past | favorite | 17 comments
Recently, I've noticed that a lot of the articles reaching the frontpage of HN, and often the top thereof, were flamebait/troll blog posts, off-topic (e.g. politics), or whatever. But moreso, the majority of posters in the comments often agreed that the article was junk! As such, one wonders, how in the world did the article rise to the top?

The problem is that when you don't allow downvoting, while it prevents the problem on sites like Reddit and Digg of "organized downvotes" and hivemind downvoting of disagreeing views, it also means that something's score depends solely on the number of upvotes. So, if you post something extremely controversial that doesn't belong on HN, it can get more upvotes that most other posts. Why is this? Here's an example (let's say HN has 1000 readers, for simple math):

Let's say you post Article A, a politics piece railing against, say... Nancy Pelosi. Lots of people are going to look at it, since its controversial, and everyone has an opinion. Let's say 50% of HN readers look at it, and 20% of those upvote it, and 60% of those would have wanted to downvote it. With downvotes, the article would have been buried quickly. But this article gets 100 upvotes and quickly flies to the top.

Now, let's say you post a very interesting article on creative use of assembly, Article B. Not nearly as many people will look at it--let's say 10% of readers. And let's say 40% of those upvote it, and 10% of those would have downvoted it if they could. The article only gets 40 upvotes, despite being much better and more on-topic HN content.

It seems to me to be much like the classic "color of the bikeshed" issue; if its something everyone has an opinion about, it gets voted up even if the majority of people think the link is junk or offtopic.

Now, my question is--how can this problem be resolved without reintroducing the problem of downvotes?




If you're worried about the signal-to-noise ratio, then I suggest you don't post things that have been posted and discussed about a gazillion times before, as this too is cluttering up the main page.

You don't have to like every single article on the main page. Hacker News wasn't made just for you. If people upvote, then clearly they disagree with you on the article. Disagreement is ok, even necessary for a useful discussion.

If you've read all the articles on the main page then I suggest you either read old threads on the topic of downvoting or just spend your time more productively by doing something creative rather than complain.


I must disagree with the comment of pmjordan. My impression is that the math argument didn't made through.

If the issue is raised over and over their might be a possibility that it has not been optimally addressed yet.

I also understand the initial question as an invitation for suggesting for a better solution. Why smashing this with a "don't ask" comment ? This is a hacker topic and it has many potential applications if a better solution is found.

Back to the initial topic. It looks like the problem comes from using a simple scalar parameter for the ranking. There are other parameters in play that could be combined to yield a more pertinent ranking: number of leads, number of votes, kind of votes (good, bad, off topic, spam, ... ), number of comments.

The ranking could also be multidimensional instead of a simple scalar value. For instance, identify hot topics, popular topics and pertinence, etc.

10 up votes may mean 90% readers up voted the subject or only 1% up voted the subject which is a very different information value.

The google story, as well as the reddit story, should remind us how important the ranking can be. The more pertinent your information channel becomes the more valuable it is.


Change the links so they're redirects from the HN app, count the number of clicks and factor that into the ordering. Instead of putting most votes on top, put highest votes per click on top.

Sure, it's easy to game the system - but if someone wants to break something they'll do it one way or the other anyway.


I don't consider this a big problem yet, the quality of frontpage submissions is still pretty good. Yes, there were a few political/financial entries recently, but still they weren't completely off-topic IMHO, given the current state of the world.

Sometimes, I like to read other HN readers opinions about the so-called "nonhackers news". Overall, I consider current voting system functional.


Flag the post and move on with your life.


Isn't flagging meant for spam-submissions? That has been my sole use of it until now, at least.


From the guidelines:

Please don't submit comments complaining that a submission is inappropriate for the site. If you think something is spam or egregiously offtopic, you can flag it by going to its page and clicking on the "flag" link. (Not all users will see this; there is a karma threshold.)


Post a link to NonHackerNews.com at the top? j/k.

But seriously, it can't unless the number of participating people who think it's off-topic outweighs the number of participating people who think otherwise. Or some form of modertion (possibly automated) happens. And even with downvotes, it might not change much. The off-topic crowd might just start downvoting the on-topic crowd in retribution. Same with the flag link, if there were trolls who really cared, they could just flag everything and make it less useful.


You know, riffing off this Matt - would it be possible for you to set up a page with HN and NHN side by side in iframes?


I've written a post at http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=320834 to see how people would react to a plethora of vote up if. It'd be helpful if people here could vote up to keep it on the front page.

I think it would illustrate the point quite well that as HN grows, a reddit element starts to appear. How that's managed is something for pg and co to work out.


If you think about it, lack of the down vote simply means that the oneness is on you as a contributor of quality content to increase the signal-to-noise ratio by submitting more good articles that will displace the junk. If the crops are plentiful enough the weeds can't grow.


The problem with people whining about the content of social news sites...just be thankful the spammers haven't overrun this site like Digg and Reddit.


I'm in complete agreement.


Has anybody thought about talking to the people who post this stuff?


Yes, but have your tried reasoning to spammers before?


Categorizing instead of ranking.

Have 5-7 categories. Interesting, Informative, Troll, etc. (perhaps the slashdot categories)

Instead of up/down, pick a category (or several)

I set the system to show me the most interesting, or most informative articles. (or a combination) I also set a troll limit, perhaps 20%, to represent the amount of troll categorization I'm willing to put up with.

Badda-boom, badda-bing. I see stuff that's interesting to me.


It's not a bad idea, but it strikes me as an over-engineered solution for a site that doesn't yet have Slashdot's problems... There are significantly fewer articles on the HN front page than there are comments in the typical Slashdot thread, and a lower troll ratio, too.




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

Search: