4 ms·
Any site like this is designed so that upvoted content is seen by a much larger number of people than down voted content (which is, after all, pretty much the p
by greendestiny 19y ago
Any site like this is designed so that upvoted content is seen by a much larger number of people than down voted content (which is, after all, pretty much the point). So you're going to get a lot more upvotes than downvotes, making rampant upvoting still strategically sound. You could weight negative positions more than positive ones, or you could also have a buy in cost. Buy in cost does provide a disincentive to voting which probably isn't desirable.
- tel 19y agoDisincentives to voting give more abstract value to an upmod. Right now the only thing that gives an upmod value is that you can only upmod a story once. Without some sort of constraint the only thing keeping people from upmodding continuously and rampantly is... RSI!
- greendestiny 19y agoWe're still talking about a single upvote per article. Its just that if you upvote every new article you'd end up ahead of the game whilst adding nothing of value.
- tel 19y agoBingo, I was being hyperbolic there. The core idea is that upmods and downmods need to embody some sense of value. Without a buy-in cost, the only contributing source of value is 1-vote-per-story exclusivity. Without a buy-in cost, nothing is stopping me (edit: or someone else, hah. I don't mean to implicate myself for the sake of rhetoric) from getting a bot together to upmod every single story essentially nullifying the benefit of my vote and still maximizing the return.