= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
NancyLebovitz comments on Tallinn-Evans $125,000 Singularity Challenge - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (369)
Hm. Right now, you can't downvote more than you've been upvoted. Suppose a Plonk costs 1000 downvotes, could only be applied once per user-pair, and increased the minimum viewability threshold of a user by 1. So if two people Plonked timtyler, his comments would start disappearing once they'd been voted down to -1, instead of -3. The opposite of a Plonk would be an Accolade and that would make comments harder to hide, lowering the threshold by 1?
Doesn't actually sound like a good idea to me, but I do sometimes get the sense that there ought to be better incentives for people to take hints.
Being plonked by a single user having a drastic effect on one's comments' visibility strikes me as having a lot of downsides.
I'm wondering (aside from that it would be nice to have killfiles) whether it would have a good effect if plonks were anonymous, but the number of plonks each person has received is public..