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.

ThisSpaceAvailable comments on Downvote stalkers: Driving members away from the LessWrong community? - Less Wrong Discussion

39 Post author: Ander 02 July 2014 12:40AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (128)

Comments (128)

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

Comment author: ThisSpaceAvailable 03 July 2014 02:52:09AM 0 points [-]

By "identity", I take it you mean not merely the user name, but whatever other identifying information the mods have? I don't understand how your second paragraph follows from your first. What is your motive for wanting the information released? If it's retribution, that has nothing to do with your second paragraph. I don't see a deterrence value, since anyone concerned about keeping their information private to avoid downvote stalking will presumably just not use their actual information in registering in the first place. I don't see a preventative justification, either; if the mods can verify identity, they should just block any new account from that person, and if they can't verify identity, then how is this an answer to people making new accounts?

Comment author: gjm 03 July 2014 06:38:10PM 0 points [-]

I meant the user name, not any other information the moderators may have.

The second paragraph is intended to follow from the first because:

  • I expect posting information about mass-downvoting to reduce its effectiveness, because
    • people will feel less bothered by getting lots of downvotes if they know they come from a low-quality mass-downvoter
    • readers who know that A has been mass-downvoting B will be aware of that when looking at B's comments and may discount downvotes on them accordingly.
  • I expect posting information about mass-downvoting to reduce its attractiveness, because
    • prospective mass-downvoters will anticipate getting exposed, with likely consequences for their own reputation (and in particular their ability to amass the karma they need for the mass-downvoting).
  • I expect the promise of future exposure to inhibit mass-downvoting by a further mechanism:
    • prospective mass-downvoters will fear that they may get not only exposed but banned, which would (at least) be an inconvenience.
Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit