The recent implementation of a -5 karma penalty for replying to comments that are at -3 or below has clearly met with some disagreement and controversy. See http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/eb9/meta_karma_for_last_30_days/7aon . However, at the same time, it seems that Eliezer's observation that trolling and related problems have over time gotten worse here may be correct. It may be that this an inevitable consequence of growth, but it may be that it can be handled or reduced with some solution or set of solutions. I'm starting this discussion thread for people to propose possible solutions. To minimize anchoring bias and related problems, I'm not going to include my ideas in this header but in a comment below. People should think about the problem before reading proposed solutions (again to minimize anchoring issues).
Well, for example, in this very thread. The post I made bringing up the idea is down to -2. Why is this?
Is the idea irrational?
Is the idea so impractical that I should have immediately realized it was a bad one and avoided a low SNR post?
Did I make spelling or grammar mistakes?
Did a particular person spot other posts of mine they disagreed with and then search for more posts to troll-moderate?
Does someone simply disagree with the idea of there being any accountability at all?
Now, given I've tried to enumerate each of the major possibilities, and the first 3 seem unlikely, I have to conclude it is possible the reason is one of the last 2. If so, the downvoting system is not doing it's job.
I intended* to downvote the comment to express disagreement. It seems pretty standard to vote this way on proposals for changes. The reasons why I disagree with obligatory downvote explanations are