= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Emile comments on Negative karma is a bad design - 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 (31)
As far as I know it's to discourage people from aiming for negative karma, and taking pride in how much they've been downvoted - as proof of their trolling or brave thinking out of the box or willingness to "tell truth to power" or whatever. I think that happened a few times.
(it's a bit like how sometimes punishing a misbehaving child can actually be "rewarding him with attention", and result in more frequent misbehaving)
Interesting. Everything is a tradeoff. When people aren't alerted to a troll, there's a cost, and when they are, there's another cost.
Is there any mechanism for booting a troll?
Essentially, no. If I recall Alicorn has to delete individual comments rather than ban users... more by oversight than design. As far as I'm aware Eliezer hasn't got a "boot troll" feature available to him either. Matt would... via an SQL UPDATE if nothing else.
Admins have the power to delete posts and comments, and probably users (though I can't think of a time it happened); I wouldn't be surprised if that was used mostly to fight spammers, not trolls.