= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Emile comments on Official Less Wrong Redesign: Nearly there - 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 (72)
"Double karma" is a weird phrasing - from what I understood, "agree/disagree" shouldn't have any impact beyond a single post, we don't keep a tally of how many people agreed or disagreed with each user ... right?
Maybe we should. I think I'm a very agreeable fellow. But maybe that's the cognitive biases talking...
Right.
I worry that if we decouple "I agree with this" and "I like this", the latter will correlate less well with contributing usefully to LW than the un-decoupled "vote up" currently does.
I don't have any particularly convincing reasons why I should worry that; just a vague feeling that it'll have more tendency to reflect poster status, applause lights, random witticisms, etc., and less tendency to indicate insight and expertise. Then again, looking at my own comment scores, I can't say that my highest-rated comments have been the ones with most insight or expertise behind them as things are...
Hm, I have the opposite impression, so let's break this down.
Current reasons to vote on a post:
A: Agree/disagree with the conclusion
B: Think the post is well argued / badly argued
C: Think the post is witty / appeals to applause lights
Right now the votes are A + B + C, now it would become B + C, you're worried about the increased weight of C, I'm happy about the increased weight of B :)