My solution to the voting problem is to separate out good posting behaviour and good voting behaviour. Weight votes by reputation, calculate reputation by judg

My solution to the voting problem is to separate out good posting behaviour and good voting behaviour. Weight votes by reputation, calculate reputation by judging each vote for difficulty (did you vote before it had obviously won / lost) and success. So you get reputation for voting up at -10 when it ends up at 1000. You lose reputation for voting up at 1000 when it ends at -10. Since judgement is subjective you need a bunch of moderators to seed the site with good judgement. Then so long as they over-ride votes on the most obvious examples it should be a self correcting reputation system. I don't understand why in HN's current system voting power comes from karma which comes from occasional good posting. You could spend most of your time flaming, getting into arguments and down voting everyone you disagree with but so long as you're quick on posting PG's articles or write the occasional good comment HN views you as a model citizen. Be interested in any critique of this as it's how ISDaily my news start-up works. (http://www.isdaily.com http://www.isdaily.com)