= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
paper-machine comments on [META] Karma for last 30 days? - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (173)
And from people who have a stalker clique that downvotes everything they post.
Or even one quick stalker with two socks.
That's a really good point. After this update, all one needs to stifle conversation with a trivial inconvenience is 3 + <EXPECTED NUMBER OF UPVOTES> sockpuppets.
Bingo.
It's strange that with the incessant game theory analysis that goes on around here, anyone could think this is a good idea.
I'd rather filter the list by counts of votes, up or down. I've turned off filters as it is.
It will be interesting. I'd expect an increase of voting, which is good in itself, but probably that increase will be predominantly about gaming the system, and retaliating against perceived gaming. We'll see how surly people get.
I wish some of the developers from the old Extropian list would implement their filtering mechanisms here. I didn't use it much, but they seemed to put some decent thought into the function and mechanics of a ratings system, instead of just tossing out some knee jerk adjustment.
Let the Karma Wars begin!
What were the extropian mailing list filters?
Thanks for asking, because I didn't realize the list was still in business.
http://www.extropy.org/emaillists.htm
I actually think they're entering their 3rd decade now. I was on it early to mid nineties.
They seem to have gone moderated - see ""EXTROPY-CHAT" LIST AGREEMENT:" on the right side of the page.
They had an elaborate user customized filtering mechanism. Usenet had regexp controlled field specific filtering. I think they built on that and went as far as transitive ranking - you could have a weighted filter of what selected people filtered.
To the extent that all the griping over signal to noise is about a desire to control what you see, and not control what others see and say, there are decades old solutions to discussion filtering. The fancy shmancy Web has been a marked deevolution of capabilities in this regard. It's pitiful. No web discussion forum I know of has filtering capabilities even in the ball park of Usenet, which was available in the 80s. Pitiful.
It wouldn't work; as far as I know the total downvotes you are allowed to give is function of your own karma; sockpuppets without karma couldn't downvote, and maintaining three sockpuppets that post enough to get karma (by upvoting each other?) sounds like a pretty non-trivial inconvenience.
The 'trivial inconvenience' described the experience for the commenter, not the experience for the stifler.
And it's not hard to get karma for sockpuppets - they can all write relatively innocuous comments and upvote each other.
Theoretically, the more sockpuppets you have, the easier it would be to give each one karma.
Then again I don't think sockpuppets are really a significant problem at the moment. Hopefully they won't grow with these changes.
So, there is a non-negligible chance of newbie become a future troll reading LW?
How many people actually have that?