= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
wedrifid 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)
The site was seriously going to hell due to long troll-started threads and troll-feeding. It's not a good use-case when intelligent comments are hidden by default, either. And I now see that contrary to the feature request, it's only asking for 5 karma for immediate descendants, not anywhere in the chain, so I shall go now and ask that to be updated.
I don't want to train readers to unhide things by default just because they might miss intelligent conversation in subthreads, I don't want intelligent conversation in places it's hidden by default from readers trusting the site mechanics, I want this site to stop feeding its trolls and would prefer a community solution rather than moderators wielding banhammers, and I want this site to focus its efforts positively rather than in amazing impressive refutations of bad ideas which is a primary failure mode of any intelligent Internet site. Threads with heavily downvoted ancestors should almost always not exist, because of their opportunity costs, the behaviors they reinforce, and other long-term consequences.
If this particular effort proves insufficient, the next step will be to make it impossible for users less than three months old (or with less than 1000 karma or something) to see comments under -3 at all.
Please clarify this for me. If I am reading correctly it indicates that currently only the immediate descendent is punished but that your orders are that all descendents of that comment shall be punished too. If so that strikes me as ridiculously shortsighted. This makes us obliged to go through the entire ancestor history of a comment every time we wish to make a reply if we wish to avoid being arbitrarily punished.
Eliezer, you should stop personally exercising your power over the forum. Your interventions are reactionary, short sighted, tend to do more harm than good and don't adequately incorporate feedback received. Consider telling someone else at SingInst what your desired outcome is and ask them to come up with a temperate, strategically sane solution that doesn't make you look silly.
Eliezer, I would take wedrifid's suggestion incredibly seriously. You have gone from problem diagnosis (not shared by most of the community it seems), to designing a solution (not agreed to be effective by most, even if the problem stood), to marshalling the extremely limited development resources this website has at its disposal to implement it. None of these steps seem to have had any agreement by the community, and if it wasn't for the bug dug out by Akis, we may not have had a chance to even discuss it after the fact.
Pacifism isn't the only failure mode for well-kept gardens. Moderator arbitrariness is a well-known other.
I agree that well-kept gardens are better, but that means MODERATION. It doesn't mean indiscriminately spraying parts of your garden with herbicide to get rid of weeds.
To clarify: HALT, MELT AND CATCH FIRE, OR THE SITE WILL DIE!
Do arbitrary moderators kill gardens? I've seen that happen only once, and there were many contributing factors - an exact clone people could switch to easily, moderators keeping their debater hat on, focus on punishment of specific instances rather than good generic policies, the venue being for socializing/kvetching which clashed with severity.
Death isn't the only type of failure mode.
Actually, you get warned as soon as you hit the Reply button.
Since the system, as it works now, asks whether we really wish to spend karma, we wouldn't need to go through. Nevertheless I agree with the latter part of your comment.