Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

shminux comments on [META] Karma for last 30 days? - Less Wrong Discussion

15 Post author: ArisKatsaris 30 August 2012 10:33AM

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

Comments (173)

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

Comment author: shminux 30 August 2012 03:37:29PM 18 points [-]

That would only make sense for posters with, say, negative karma in the last month. Otherwise this results in (self-)censoring of controversial comments.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 30 August 2012 04:00:36PM *  1 point [-]

It's almost always possible to package controversial claims so that the posts/comments communicating them would be upvoted (and would be better for that).

Comment author: shminux 30 August 2012 04:33:26PM 9 points [-]

True, though I hoped that this forum would not demand as high a level of political correctness. Especially given that there is a simple technical solution.

Comment author: buybuydandavis 30 August 2012 06:59:39PM 0 points [-]

Censoring seems to be the point.

Comment author: shminux 30 August 2012 07:06:34PM 7 points [-]

Censoring trolls seems to be the point, not censoring discussions of potentially controversial comments left by the respected forum regulars.

Comment author: buybuydandavis 30 August 2012 10:22:07PM *  6 points [-]

Where you see a troll, I may see an insightful fellow.

I always wonder why so many people assume that the censoring gun can only blast people they want censored.

Comment author: shminux 30 August 2012 10:42:25PM *  9 points [-]

Hence my suggestion of only applying it to those with negative 30-day karma. This excludes spuriously downvoted comments and prevents most malicious sniping strategies.

Comment author: buybuydandavis 30 August 2012 10:58:05PM *  7 points [-]

Ok, I was speaking to the original policy.

Your policy looks well targeted to people I'd consider trolls. The thing is, I think the people in favor of the original policy have a much broader view of what constitutes a troll.

Seems like a sizable minority want a lot of other people to shut up.