= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
common_law comments on Meta: What do you think of a karma vote checklist? - 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 (58)
In theory, upvotes are supposed to indicate what you want more of, and downvotes are what you'd like to see less of.
I don't know how many LWers use them that way, rather than for agree/disagree.
I experiment with these things. Based on a period of years, during which I occupied different personae, it's clear to me that I can get upvoted reliably if I clearly articulate and intelligently apply the LW-consensus analyses. I will get downvoted severely if I--stupidly or intelligently--articulate an original position that contradicts the LW consensus. As I say, I don't see how it can be otherwise, if LW is to function as a community with consensus views on eclectic matters.
I wonder what you mean by "in theory." If that means "according to the standard LW rhetoric," I agree.