= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
TimS comments on Configurations and Amplitude - 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 (375)
There is a point at which not getting the message from karma is sufficiently damaging to the community that moderator action is called for.
Karma does not merely send messages to the user, but actually does the work of moderation by causing comments to be hidden.
On the sidebar too? That's the most aggravating issue, to me.
If that's the problem, shouldn't the solution be to implement comment-hiding on the sidebar?
Comments in the sidebar tend to be too new to have been voted below -3 or whatever the threshold is.
One could make the sidebar-threshold lower than the ordinary threshold....
True, but it would discriminate less well. It would hide many OK comments that happened to be downvoted once or twice.
Note that for this solution to be an argument against the banning solution, it would need to actually be implemented. Are you predicting that will happen?
I'm saying it ought to be done, if the problem is as described. Or, in other words, that I prefer such a solution over the alternative being proposed (moderator intervention to remove comments).
So you're not saying that you prefer no banning to banning (given whatever you predict will actually happen to the sidebar)?
I thought I was saying that.