[Shish2k]

For disagreement, write a comment explaining /why/ you disagree.

(It's similar to HN's policy* of "prefer discussion to downvotes")

* EDIT: I mean culture; as in I've seen it mentioned a lot by users of the site, though it's not in the rules

[dang]

> It's similar to HN's policy of "prefer discussion to downvotes"

HN has never had any such policy.

Edit: We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10356268 and marked it off-topic.

[Shish2k]

I mean HN the community rather than HN the website (As in, every time I've seen a meta-discussion about the HN voting system, something along those lines has been mentioned; though I guess that's more "culture" than "policy")

[dang]

That view isn't HN's culture. Yes it always gets mentioned, but so does the opposite view. The community is divided.

To the extent that HN itself has a policy it was set years ago by pg saying that downvoting for disagreement is ok.

[Shish2k]

> pg saying that downvoting for disagreement is ok.

I'm surprised I've not heard that before; but either way, I guess I stand thoroughly corrected, and will know better in future. Thank you for replying to explain my error and not just downvoting :)

[striking]

People have asked for discussion rather than down votes when they know a point they've written is controversial. But that's for very few posts.

[SquirrelOnFire]

Policy? Maybe not, but the apparent lack of downvote buttons seem to indicate that the ethos of "discussion over downvotes" is on the mark.

[biot]

Try reading the FAQ:

  Why don't I see down arrows?

  There are no down arrows on stories. They appear on comments
  after users reach a certain karma threshold, but never on
  direct replies.

Since your account was created 5 minutes ago, you lack the karma to downvote.

[codyb]

Downvoting is enabled once you hit 500 karma, a policy presumably meant to ensure that those most likely to contribute to a quality discussion are also the most likely to have good judgement in downvoting less quality discussion.

[jonknee]

There is a downvote button after you have gotten some karma.

See: http://i.imgur.com/dqItM9R.png

[giaour]

Downvote buttons become visible when you have sufficient karma to vote something down.

[baddox]

Not everyone lacks downvote buttons. I have them. I don't know how you get them, but I assume it's related to account age and/or karma.

[Mithaldu]

Looking at the responses to the parent, i wish there was also a "mark comment as duplicate" button. Maybe i still lack the karma!

[baddox]

Yeah, that's unfortunate. I clicked Reply when there were no replies, but by the time I composed my reply there were several others.

[feider]

Why should it not be possible simply by clicking?

[Cthulhu_]

Because there's criticism and constructive criticism; the one is easy, impersonal (in the form of downvotes or dislike buttons), and completely useless because it just goes "I don't like this" - or, in relatable terms, a Linus-ism of "This code is shit".

Instead, both the criticism-giver and the receiver are better off if you went "This code is shit, /because/ so-and so, and you can improve it in this-and-that way".

Of course, a "I like this /because/" is also more constructive than a "I like this". But I'm sure there's been plenty of examples that no matter how many "I like this"-es you get, it only takes one "this sucks, you suck" to demotivate someone.

[Shish2k]

Imagine you're at an automated restaurant. There are buttons for "order fries", "order cake", "order sandwich", and "do not order pie". Can you see why the last button in that list is not as useful as the first three?

Positive sentiment needs no explanation because it inherits the context of the thing it is agreeing with; negative sentiment needs explanation else it is somewhere between useless and nonsense.

[shitloadofbooks]

I don't have enough karma to downvote you, so I'm replying to you to tell you that everything you posted is a load of hogwash and your analogy is bad.

Of course negative sentiment also "inherits the context of the thing it is (dis)agreeing with."

You glean just as much information from someone clicking Like and leaving no context as you do someone clicking Dislike and leaving no context.

[Shish2k]

> You glean just as much information from someone clicking Like and leaving no context as you do someone clicking Dislike and leaving no context.

I disagree; Perhaps a programming analogy instead?

if(x == 0) # when this is true, you know what x is, and what it isn't

if(x != 0) # when this is true, you only know what x isn't

Like with no context tells the receiver what the audience wants (more of the same); dislike doesn't (okay, so don't do this thing, but do what instead?).

That's what I mean by the analogy - "do this" is a much more useful statement than "don't do that".