4 ms·
I feel that ranks should be a combination of explicit and implicit activity. If a story link is followed a certain number of times, if a certain amount of time
by makecheck 10y ago
I feel that ranks should be a combination of explicit and implicit activity.
If a story link is followed a certain number of times, if a certain amount of time is spent on a page, etc. these indicators might contribute to an “implicit upvote” for a story or contribute in some way to its rank regardless of explicit up-votes. It’s also really important to have a good way to recognize and consolidate duplicates and reward them equally.
Activity in a comment subtree should also implicitly increase the rank of a comment. I have occasionally seen comments that were mysteriously not upvoted even once, despite spawning multiple levels of subtree discussion; in such case, isn’t the comment implicitly “more valuable” by creating a lengthy discussion, even if no one ever explicitly upvoted it?
- hueving 10y agoNo, a lack of upvote on a comment usually means the comment was wrong according to someone and it spawned an argument. I definitely don't want those cases ranked higher than good discussions where all commenters are receiving votes. Similarly, an article that someone spends 10 minutes reading and then doesn't upvote (or comments without upvote) means it was probably a massive waste of time.
- inimino 10y agoNot if the only discussion is to explain why it's wrong or off-topic.