= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Viliam_Bur comments on Self-serving meta: Whoever keeps block-downvoting me, is there some way to negotiate peace? - 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)
Comments (281)
Sure it does. But let's suppose that user A downvotes everything from user B, while most other users generally like the posts from user B. How likely is it that the community as a whole would benefit if the user B becomes discouraged by this behavior and leaves?
Let's assume the user A behaves this way towards users B, C, D. In this case we have one person trying to send away three people, that other users don't mind. How likely is this to improve the website?
Maybe it would be good to have some accepted way for the user A to express their dislike towards the user B, and let the community decide -- a democratic ostracism vote, instead of an assassination. The key is that the community as a whole expresses their opinion, not just one individual removes another individual.
Unlikely.
Unlikely.
Dislike is another matter entirely. What we're talking about is ways for A to express their preference that B not post here. And, as I've said, it seems we do have a way for A to express that preference: downvoting.
I agree with you completely that in the examples you list, and other similar examples where A's preference is a likely-mistaken one, any mechanism that allows A to effectively act on that preference will likely harm the site.
Sure, I endorse that.
For example, we could provide a mechanism whereby other users (E, F, G, etc.) can upvote contributions from users they consider valuable. Then the net karma score of users (B, C, D) would respect the collective opinions of the community as a whole, including but not limited to A's opinion.
The first situation that you call unlikely is empirically happening. See Daenery's comment here. The second situation you call unlikely also seems to be happening given that multiple users have reported the block downvoting to be occurring in a very similar fashion, and the political motivation in many of the cases looks identical.
I invite you to re-read Viliam_Bur's question, which I quoted, and let me know if you still think your response is apposite.
If so, let me know, and I'll consider it more carefully.
If not, I further invite you to consider the process whereby it seemed apposite at first, and what that process suggests about the context of this discussion.
Yes, it does. Am I misinterpreting your statement, Viliam's statement or am I missing some other context?
Well, you tell me.
VB's question: "(Say situation X occurs.) How likely is it that the community as a whole would benefit if the user B becomes discouraged by this behavior and leaves?"
My answer: "Unlikely."
Your response: "The first situation that you call unlikely is empirically happening."
If I assume you understood everything properly, then you're claiming that it is empirically demonstrable that the community as a whole is benefiting from user B (I infer daenerys, given your link) getting discouraged and leaving.
But I doubt that's what you meant.
I think it most likely that you misunderstood my "Unlikely" to be a response to something other than the question VB asked... so probably you understood me to mean something like "It is unlikely that there's a user B being discouraged by user A's downvoting behavior."
Would you agree?
Yes, exactly. Ok. So I didn't misread Viliam's comment. Rather I misinterpreted your statement as a statement that his premise was unlikely. Thanks for clearing that up.
You're welcome.
Do you have any thoughts about why it was so difficult for you to notice that "Unlikely" was a response to "How likely is it that X?", rather than an assertion that VB's premise was unlikely?
The most probable explanation is that I engaged in the fairly common failing of reading an opinion which I disagreed with in a way that made it weaker than stronger. Do you have a distinct explanation I should consider?
What was the opinion you disagreed with?