You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

JoshuaZ comments on [Funny] Even Clippy can be blamed on the use of non-Bayesian methods - Less Wrong Discussion

31 Post author: lukeprog 02 October 2011 07:40AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (46)
Tags: bayes

Comments (46)

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

Comment author: JoshuaZ 03 October 2011 01:38:21PM 0 points [-]

Ok. But the real thing is the discrepancy between them. While that comment I made is at +24, this comment is at +2 where it uses a nearly identical level of sources and analysis about a somewhat similar set of demographic issues.

It isn't just that some funny comments get voted up a lot. It is that there's very little general pattern to how far one comment gets up compared to another even when they are very similar comments.

Comment author: [deleted] 03 October 2011 02:25:24PM *  9 points [-]

Comments get more upvotes, independent of quality, if they:

  • Are in a high-traffic thread
  • Are made while the thread is still new
  • Get an early complimentary reply
  • Make a point many people agree with and care about (especially if the first to make that point)
  • Become the highest-karma comment early on (bandwagon + people may only read/vote on the first few comments, so being the top comment is valuable)
  • Are closer to top-level (people don't read deep into threads unless particularly interested)

I think these effects, in aggregate, are probably much stronger determinants of comment karma than actual quality. Top-level posts, to main or discussion, suffer from fewer of these effects, so their karma is a little more reliable. But I hope no one is taking their comment karma too much to heart.

Comment author: pedanterrific 03 October 2011 02:29:13PM 2 points [-]

I think that karma is a useful feedback but only at a very approximate level. ...

... there's very little general pattern to how far one comment gets voted up compared to another even when they are very similar comments.

If that's true, then... what's the point of karma scores?

How about this: keep track of total votes behind the scenes, but only report whether the karma is [- -] for k<-5, [-] for -4<k<0, [0], [+] for 0<k<+10, or [+ +] for k>+10.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit