There are threads where expressing a well formed, well reasoned, well supported but contrary opinion runs the risk of downvotes to greyness. The root of the problem is inevitably that the topic of the thread is a poor fit for HN at that particular point in time [and perhaps always].
A symptom of the problem is that such threads tempt so many people to express their opinion for the sake of expressing it. I get lured in sometimes too. But when I can stop myself, I just flag the thread. And if I need to feel better, maybe I go through and down vote comments I disagree with in lieu of telling people their political, economic, or ethical views are wrong.
That's better than me just adding to the noise and heat and lack of civility. Downvotes are socially acceptable. So are upvotes.
What about topics that are important and relevant to HN but invoke a polarised opinion on HN?
My concerns can be summarized into a single question - If HN had existed historically with the rules as they exist currently, would Georg Cantor have thrived in it?
> If HN had existed historically with the rules as they exist currently, would Georg Cantor have thrived in it?
I doubt it. Unconventional ideas that are orders of magnitude less radical than Cantor's get reduced to convention and dismissed all the time on HN. It's dismaying. But it is what human beings do, and especially what human beings in groups do. HN can't change that by proclaiming rules. Maybe we can mitigate it a little, such as by asking people to avoid gratuitous negativity.
I flag bad threads. To me if a thread is producing bad behavior then it's bad. Most of the threads that fall into the category of important and bad are posted for discussion elsewhere.
A symptom of the problem is that such threads tempt so many people to express their opinion for the sake of expressing it. I get lured in sometimes too. But when I can stop myself, I just flag the thread. And if I need to feel better, maybe I go through and down vote comments I disagree with in lieu of telling people their political, economic, or ethical views are wrong.
That's better than me just adding to the noise and heat and lack of civility. Downvotes are socially acceptable. So are upvotes.