Ask HN: where'd my ability to downvote go?
I used to be able to and my karma is 131. For about a week now I've noticed that I'm back to up arrows only again.
Thanks.
30 comments
This change was noted in the recent Arc 3.1 release discussion. Based on that comment I think the threshold is now 200 karma.
http://arclanguage.org/item?id=10254
http://arclanguage.org/item?id=10254
Thanks for that.
63... correction 61 points to go.
It's probably a reflection of the size of HN. The more popular it gets the more people are flowing in at the bottom, to keep the place from descending into mayhem the karma thresholds can be ratcheted up.
200 still seems pretty low though.
It's probably a reflection of the size of HN. The more popular it gets the more people are flowing in at the bottom, to keep the place from descending into mayhem the karma thresholds can be ratcheted up.
200 still seems pretty low though.
I can still downvote, so presumably the threshold has been moved up a bit.
Just write a few more insightful comments or submit some good stories and you'll probably be able to downvote again.
Just write a few more insightful comments or submit some good stories and you'll probably be able to downvote again.
I can still downvote as well, so that may give a slightly better idea of the new threshold value (you're in the top 25 on the leaderboard, so it's hard to predict the threshold value from your karma level).
In any case, why isn't the threshold value set dynamically? Maybe something like "if the user is within the top 70% of karma earners for the past week AND within the top 85% of karma earners all time" then allow them to downvote. This way it always adjusts to the traffic on the site and doesn't need to be manually changed unless you want to tweak the parameters a bit.
In any case, why isn't the threshold value set dynamically? Maybe something like "if the user is within the top 70% of karma earners for the past week AND within the top 85% of karma earners all time" then allow them to downvote. This way it always adjusts to the traffic on the site and doesn't need to be manually changed unless you want to tweak the parameters a bit.
Yeah, I spend way too much time on this site :-)
Being on HN (no matter how much time you spend here) is probably one of the best learning experiences and ways to invest your time there is.
My daily reading list is usually just about exhausted by the time I go to bed, if HN gets any bigger I'll have to get more selective about what I read.
So much interesting stuff gets posted here.
My daily reading list is usually just about exhausted by the time I go to bed, if HN gets any bigger I'll have to get more selective about what I read.
So much interesting stuff gets posted here.
True - I started programming around 1½ years ago, since it seemed like a good skill to have. Without HN I wouldn't have come as far as I have, and would be oblivious to a lot of core concepts such as the MVC model and recursion. So thank you HN for teaching me stuff I didn't know before.
[deleted]
Thanks. Was just wondering if it was something I did wrong. If the threshold changed that's fine. :)
do you mean topics or comments?
I can't downvote topics. [3446 karma]
I can't downvote topics. [3446 karma]
Comments, can anyone downvote topics? I didn't know that was even possible.
You can always flag...
[deleted]
No, it's not possible. That is what flagging is for.
thats what I thought
Downvoting is pointless. It encourages mass retribution against unpopular but valid topics.
As someone else said, if a topic is broken -- spam, stupid or otherwise useless -- it should be flagged appropriately. My two cents, or probably about six cents worth 1 cent in 1987 values.
As someone else said, if a topic is broken -- spam, stupid or otherwise useless -- it should be flagged appropriately. My two cents, or probably about six cents worth 1 cent in 1987 values.
Someone voted you down. I voted you back up again. At least voting up is useful! (Feels good, too.)
Seriously, while down votes are needed sometimes, I think they are overused. I often see a legitimate comment voted down because someone apparently disagrees with its contents. This is not what down votes are for.
Seriously, while down votes are needed sometimes, I think they are overused. I often see a legitimate comment voted down because someone apparently disagrees with its contents. This is not what down votes are for.
This keeps coming up, and people keep linking to pg's post on saying that's exactly the intent of down-voting.
Well, pg controls it to a large extent, but not 100%.
It's his site. If he says downvoting is appropriate for expressing disagreement, then there's no basis for saying that isn't "what down votes are for".
He has built the site, and people are building the news forum. It appears (or perhaps "it emerges") that what they are using the voting system for is close to his vision but not 100%. Of course he can still guide it, but the crowd works its ways.
Particularly when you go "against the grain" on here. If I dare say anything negative about LISP, Emacs, the environment or business mentality, I get shot down straight away.
You can't downvote topics.