3 ms·

I'm not sure how accurate your assumption that new users are voters on the homepage is. As a new user, most of my votes are on the "New" section rather than th

I'm not sure how accurate your assumption that new users are voters on the homepage is. As a new user, most of my votes are on the "New" section rather than the homepage. I vote up the things that I think other people should (on New), rather than what everyone is going to see anyways because its up on the front page. I do think that some sort of weight system for upvotes would be an interesting feature.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
BrandonM 16y ago
You're actually helping to make his point. You're a new user; you help determine what hits the front page by voting in the "New" section. barrkel is extrapolating his own behavior as an older member: he tends to only consider front page items for upvotes. Thus, new users determine what makes the front page, all users help determine the front page ordering, and "classic" view reflects how old users would order the front page. The question is whether barrkel's voting patterns are an appropriate model for older members. Personally (as another older member), I visit "New" perhaps once a week, but when I do I'm much more likely to vote up a story that I find to have even a little bit of value. I only vote up front page stories that I find extraordinarily useful or interesting. There is no reason to assume that the interaction model used by barrkel and me are representative of all older members, so while his argument is interesting, it's not very well supported.
- barrkel 16y ago
  Actually, there is evidence to support my model: the fact that classic front page is very similar to the normal front page, except with a different sorting order. This evidence can be interpreted in (at least) two ways, (a) that most voting occurs based on the front page, or (b) that the front page topic themes, and by extrapolation user tastes, have remained consistent over time. I (based on my own voting, and now yours too, but also the number of votes front-page articles get vs stuff that doesn't make it to the front page, evident from resubmission successes etc.) would guess that hypothesis (a) is more likely than hypothesis (b); but in any case, the fact that there's an alternative explanation for the similarity in the two front pages means that PG's hypothesis of (b) is on shaky ground.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

BrandonM 16y ago

You're actually helping to make his point. You're a new user; you help determine what hits the front page by voting in the "New" section. barrkel is extrapolating his own behavior as an older member: he tends to only consider front page items for upvotes. Thus, new users determine what makes the front page, all users help determine the front page ordering, and "classic" view reflects how old users would order the front page. The question is whether barrkel's voting patterns are an appropriate model for older members. Personally (as another older member), I visit "New" perhaps once a week, but when I do I'm much more likely to vote up a story that I find to have even a little bit of value. I only vote up front page stories that I find extraordinarily useful or interesting. There is no reason to assume that the interaction model used by barrkel and me are representative of all older members, so while his argument is interesting, it's not very well supported.

barrkel 16y ago
Actually, there is evidence to support my model: the fact that classic front page is very similar to the normal front page, except with a different sorting order. This evidence can be interpreted in (at least) two ways, (a) that most voting occurs based on the front page, or (b) that the front page topic themes, and by extrapolation user tastes, have remained consistent over time. I (based on my own voting, and now yours too, but also the number of votes front-page articles get vs stuff that doesn't make it to the front page, evident from resubmission successes etc.) would guess that hypothesis (a) is more likely than hypothesis (b); but in any case, the fact that there's an alternative explanation for the similarity in the two front pages means that PG's hypothesis of (b) is on shaky ground.