My only problem with representation here is that if you have differing opinions than one of the other groups, you get downvoted into oblivion. Hell, saying anything that goes remotely against the tide gets you downvoted.
I can understand what he means though, because most people that downvote me are "JS hipsters." Since these people comment the most, they have the ability to control the conversation, and thus leave a larger visible proportion of representation.
Everyone has this policing tone, too, and it's obnoxious.
Nah, one has to learn to stop caring about downvotes that much. You can very well express contrarian views on HN, and yes, you sometimes have to pay the price in blood^H^H^H^H^Hkarma. Like with all worthy causes. What matters is that people will engage your argument constructively, if you write it in a substantial and civil way.
Case in point: only yesterday 'miguelrochefort had the guts to post advocating a completely contrarian view on privacy[0]. That particular comment, predictably, got downvoted, but it didn't stop a thoughtful discussion from spawning. As long as this happens, HN serves its purpose.
--
Also, how do you know that people who downvote you are "JS hipsters" and not someone else? :).
I can understand what he means though, because most people that downvote me are "JS hipsters." Since these people comment the most, they have the ability to control the conversation, and thus leave a larger visible proportion of representation.
Everyone has this policing tone, too, and it's obnoxious.