cousin_it comments on On Comments, Voting, and Karma - Part I - Less Wrong

7 Post author: thomblake 07 April 2009 02:44AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (47)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: cousin_it 07 April 2009 03:08:59PM *  4 points [-]

The programming language community blog Lambda the Ultimate had similar problems some years ago and seems to have emerged successful. Guess having a benevolent dictator editor is important. Here's the relevant discussion from 2006. My own two cents there, that I still stand by today:

The only way to improve the quality of discussions is to filter out the bozos. Don't moderate postings; moderate people.

For me, read-only access to "old LtU" would be more pleasant than read-write access to "new LtU". In other words: I don't think bans are "extreme", my vote is for a lot more bans, and I wouldn't mind being banned myself if this improves the signal-to-noise ratio.

Edit: it seems someone took my words to heart and started downvoting my whole comment history without explanation. Nice! Sadly I can't tell if it's happening to anyone else.

Comment author: thomblake 07 April 2009 03:26:21PM 2 points [-]

The only way to improve the quality of discussions is to filter out the bozos. Don't moderate postings; moderate people.

I disagree. Most people who make high-quality comments also make a large number of low-quality comments. Filtering out bad comments is essential if we want the good ones to float to the top.

Comment author: ciphergoth 07 April 2009 04:03:27PM 1 point [-]

Sure, but usually it's only a very few folk who make actively damaging comments - comments that for no reward absorb more time and energy from the community than just the time to read them because of the responses they attract.

Comment author: GuySrinivasan 07 April 2009 04:50:27PM 2 points [-]

I'd like to filter out actively damaging comments and the large number of low-quality comments. Banning only people will not help with that.

Comment author: pjeby 07 April 2009 07:19:20PM 2 points [-]

It happens to me regularly - my karma drops by roughly the number of comments I've posted since the last time it happened. It's annoying, but since my overall karma still grows, it's clearly noise.

Also, it's possible the same person is downvoting everybody in this thread; I had a drop of about 10 points today. (I skipped posting any comments this weekend, so my overall comment rate has gotten kind of low lately.)

Perhaps someone is just trying to "win" at karma?

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 07 April 2009 03:37:08PM 1 point [-]

I just lost 20 points in half an hour.

Comment author: ciphergoth 07 April 2009 03:58:14PM 1 point [-]

A similar thing happened to me a while back.

Comment author: cousin_it 07 April 2009 03:45:26PM *  1 point [-]

Woah, I also lost 20 in half an hour. Doesn't look like a coincidence.

Comment author: Annoyance 07 April 2009 07:24:54PM 0 points [-]

I've not only noticed this happening to me (which is to be expected), but to a number of other people, most especially those who have seemingly earned the dislike of the local Powers That Be.

I'm considering stepping in to correct such injustices, but thus far my desire to vote up/down based solely on individual merit has prevented me. If it keeps up, let us know, and I'll start changing my strategy.

Comment author: AnnaSalamon 07 April 2009 09:43:23PM 4 points [-]

I'm considering stepping in to correct such injustices, but thus far my desire to vote up/down based solely on individual merit has prevented me. If it keeps up, let us know, and I'll start changing my strategy.

Don't. It probably happens to people who like the local Powers That Be, too. My karma dropped 17 points in 10 minutes some days ago, for no reason I was aware of. Karma doesn't matter all that much, and not acting like power-struggling children about karma does matter. Even if there is systematic injustice in some particular direction, there's better information-flow in pointing out the distortion and letting people consciously realize that karma is unreliable in such-and-such a way, than in adding further information-poor voting to try to compensate.

Comment author: anonym 07 April 2009 07:37:25PM 1 point [-]

If somebody went to your userpage and then sequentially voted down all your comments in a short period of time based on nothing related to quality control (which is probably what happened here if the downvotes were by one person), the system should be able to spot that sort of abuse and ban the user or take other action.

Comment author: thomblake 07 April 2009 08:22:13PM 1 point [-]

If that was automatic, it would be a problem for me. I often go back through the recent comments listing and do a flurry of quality-control voting; otherwise, comments on older posts slip through the cracks.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 07 April 2009 08:56:52PM *  5 points [-]

I worry that some people may hold conflicting views on what the comments are for.

  • First, comments may act as little notes, contributing a piece of information or insight, relevant to the context in which it's made.
  • Second, comments may serve communication, letting a specific person know something, correcting a mistake, voicing an opinion, adding a detail to resolve an earlier misunderstanding.

Relevant communication must not be punished. There is no way to support a conversation without these communication comments that are not intended to hold generally appreciated pearls of wisdom in them.

Comment author: thomblake 09 April 2009 02:41:45PM 1 point [-]

I think this better reflects conflicting views on what voting is for. I don't vote something down as punishment; I vote it down because I don't think it's interesting enough to belong at the top of the page.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 09 April 2009 03:13:49PM *  1 point [-]

If posting a certain kind of comments results in expected decrease in karma, people will avoid doing that, so there is an inseparable component of punishment. What you say would only work if there were two separate comment ratings, one for other readers, and one for the writer. Essentially, the hard/soft voting distinction developed to play this role.

Comment author: thomblake 09 April 2009 03:42:02PM 1 point [-]

I suppose that's true if people would really take a decrease in karma as a reason not to post a comment.

If people are doing that, they probably should be punished for it.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 09 April 2009 04:13:07PM 4 points [-]

I'll see about adding the ability to vote down comments that weren't posted for not being posted.

Comment author: thomblake 09 April 2009 05:17:58PM 0 points [-]

My (somewhat limited) knowledge of Python suggests to me that this would not be an easy task; I daresay it might be nearly impossible.

But I agree - we should implement something like that if we can.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 09 April 2009 04:25:32PM 0 points [-]

I suppose that's true if people would really take a decrease in karma as a reason not to post a comment.
If people are doing that, they probably should be punished for it.

You are evil.

Comment author: thomblake 09 April 2009 05:16:30PM 0 points [-]

You are evil.

I have to know - in what sense did you mean this? "not morally good"? "deviously scheming to align the world with my preferences"? "hates paladins"?

For now, I'll just take it as a compliment.

Comment author: anonym 07 April 2009 10:24:56PM 1 point [-]

I said userpage, not recent comments. If you don't often view all comments of just a single user and then issue 20 or more downvotes in quick succession, I wasn't suggesting anything that would affect you. There are lots of abuses that can't easily be caught, but abuse like I've outlined, which based on comments here has occurred a few times recently, should be easy to catch.