[nickpsecurity]

It's worth trying to figure out something as it's a problem here enough people occasionally leave. It's basically mob or follow-the-leader mentality that results in reflexive downvotes on hot-topics when dissenting comments appear. I encountered this when I got into battles with tptacek not knowing he was No 1 or whatever here. I barely care about the popularity or politics as I focus on getting right info to right people. So, I didn't stop when every comment I had was being downvoted at once multiple times. (shrugs)

Nonetheless, I still watched it with fascination in a group dynamics sense as any comment to him had this pattern: a single, nearly-instant downvote (him or biggest fan); a few more in a short period that grayed my post out; his own often going gray after a bit longer; mine ungraying; his ungraying hit and miss; stabilization at anywhere from like -2 to +4. Only happens with fan-favorite people (eg him), tech (eg Rust/C), or topics (eg anti-VC claims naturally) here as my other posts consistently get ignored, a few votes (good or bad), or major upvote for outliers. My net impression was that it represented mob voting by groups for and against those popular individuals as I was unestablished here at the time.

I guess what I'm getting at is there's gotta be an overlap between the spikes, where they're showing up, and who makes them show up. If a negative surge registers as fan-driven pattern, rather than diverse, then points in the other direction might counter it. Some fraction of the total fan-driven votes while ignoring the other votes which were independent. This might stop tyranny of the majority from making dissenting, but otherwise informative, opinions from disappearing. Or it could be as simple as noticing the effect, capping number of negative votes that can come in on that comment/thread, and preventing gray out. Keeps the numbers honest while achieving same objective. So, those are just a few ideas to throw around based on what I've seen.

The data also led me to counter the disinformation spread elsewhere that critiquing these hot people or topics will totally destroy your karma on HN. I've hit them all and consistently to the point that my account would've disappeared within 3-5 business days of beginning. ;) So, the mobs are there & have significant effect that can deter new or less aggressive commenters. Yet, the moderation & community culture keeps it minimal to point that a mix of supportive and neutral, informative comments brings in enough upvotes to easily counter it. Blocking their ability to disappear dissenting comments upon detecting fan-driven, vote surges might be all it takes.

[striking]

It's really not about establishment, except for a particular few people. Informative opinions that are "out of the norm" will get upvotes, almost always, as long as they're written in a kind manner. They'll be downvoted first, and get a massive corrective upvote stream.

I feel like you're looking at commenting wrong here. You're not doing battle with people. Yes, sometimes you get downvoted "incorrectly", there are always stray votes in either direction. But I've found that politeness and care have always received upvotes, no matter what position stood behind them.

Maybe it's... a personal issue? I don't want to insult you, but being overly combative definitely garners downvotes.

PS: take note that you can't downvote a comment that is in reply to you. :)

[nickpsecurity]

"They'll be downvoted first, and get a massive corrective upvote stream."

That's actually exactly what I saw. I wasn't sure if it was a trend or tied to specific people/topics. So, a trend then.

" But I've found that politeness and care have always received upvotes, no matter what position stood behind them."

Oh I agree. That's been a good chunk of my karma. There are battle's of the minds on occasion, though, when people have strong opinions or attachment to topics. I actually get many upvotes on those but only when I stick to solid arguments with no personal attacks. I usually include references. Outside that, what you said about courtesy and facts is the majority of it.

"PS: take note that you can't downvote a comment that is in reply to you. :)"

Never even noticed that! Helps clarify some prior events. Thanks for the tip.

[tptacek]

This doesn't surprise me. There are people who follow my comments (just like there are about 10 people I follow). I've commented on many-days-old stories before and seen those comments voted on immediately.

So, while I think this does happen, I wouldn't chalk it up to a mob mentality; it's just that arguing with me, or 'patio11, or 'edw519, or 4-5 other accounts is likely to get your comment seen more quickly than arguing with someone else.

As for me downvoting you: I try not to downvote people I'm debating with directly at all, but you have the misfortune of arguing with me exclusively on a topic that I have profesionally strong opinions about. :)

[nickpsecurity]

Interesting point. About that...

"As for me downvoting you: I try not to downvote people I'm debating with directly at all, but you have the misfortune of arguing with me exclusively on a topic that I have profesionally strong opinions about. :)"

...I was going to say something along those lines to the first commenter. No worries or anything. Just two people that can be more aggressive on their favorite topics, esp involving their livelihoods. ;) The reason I used our debates as an example was just because I knew there was data to mine in them on voting surges. It was first time I saw it happen here.

"it's just that arguing with me, or 'patio11, or 'edw519, or 4-5 other accounts is likely to get your comment seen more quickly than arguing with someone else."

Makes sense.

"I try not to downvote people I'm debating with directly at all,"

I only downvote spam or occasionally flames/slander w/out substance. I upvote opponents' arguments, including yours, if they make good points or bring up misinformation worth countering specifically for others' benefit. I think it improves quality of discussion if both sides points are more visible.

[dang]

It's hard to detect fan-driven vote surges. I'm not convinced it's possible to do that, or at best the signal would be a weak one.

FWIW I was surprised to read this comment insofar as I don't associate your account with this kind of conflict at all. I just like your technical posts and think you've contributed a lot here.

What I meant upthread is that if you engaged with the Apply HN startups who are active in technical areas you know about, that could be valuable.

[nickpsecurity]

Oh, I understood your suggestion. I've been doing it on the C thread haha. This was a little tangent that I found interesting given a number of people quit HN over claims of massive downvotes on certain topics for not following the leader. That was weird given my experience was contrary w/ similar, but small, effect. It could affect Show/Apply people in theory if it's true. So, I just wanted to bring some examples to attention of you and others to get feedback on what was going on.

It's been enlightening so far in that I've gotten some clarity. striking and tptacek basically told me two other trends that apply here in general were probably at work instead of the mob hypothesis. Rules it out actually in some cases although not others. So, now I keep that in mind as I evaluate further data.

Overall, I'm impressed by how little data I have on it as it implies good things about the forum's quality. ;)