5 ms·
But two comments with equal points given at different times on the same thread are likely not equally informative; the newer one had fewer impressions but recei
by abeppu 16y ago
But two comments with equal points given at different times on the same thread are likely not equally informative; the newer one had fewer impressions but receiving the same points has a higher points to views ratio. Part of the problem with points is that people try to use them like you are -- to gauge agreement for correctness, or who 'won' a discussion or whatever -- but points are a really crappy indicator of that. Points should be normed by impressions, and then smoothed (or given credibility intervals or something).
- munchhausen 16y ago> Points should be normed by impressions, and then smoothed (or given credibility intervals or something). I agree that this might work better for determining correctness of informative comments than just plain point scores, however point scores work better than nothing at all.
- lwhi 16y agoIf someone states something that's incorrect, reply to the comment and explain why! ;)
- moe 16y agoBut often there are multiple replies with opposing opinions. Without the points we don't know which opinion HN agrees with.
- lwhi 16y agoHN isn't an entity - and you can't rely on aggregation to form an opinion. You still need to think and form your own opinions.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- bruce511 16y ago>> Points should be normed by impressions, and then smoothed (or given credibility intervals or something). While technically you're right, that seems like taking a really simple idea and making it really complicated. Comment scores act as a "trend" of what people are thinking - it's not like a football game where the highest score wins. If I see a discussion it's useful to see a) how many people care enough to bother to vote either way and b) what sort of proportions are involved. I think most people here can accept that not every comment in a thread gets the same number of eyeballs, and therefore the "scores" are not necessarily directly comparable.
- abeppu 16y agoAnd yet clearly people do compare scores. The problem is that scores aren't like trends; they're like integrating a 'popularity' measure over time. As a consequence, you get a strong bias towards the stuff with the most points being comments from near the beginning of the discussion, not what's most correct or interesting or insightful.
- bruce511 16y agoSince I can't see your score, and you can't see mine, I honestly have no idea at this point whether more people agree with you than with me. Or indeed if no-one cares at all. When this thread is referenced to a week from now there is no way to see what sort of agreement occurred with either one of us. There are a bunch of "for" comments, and a bunch of "against" comments, but ultimately no resolution (that either of us can see.) So a plethora of "me too" postings occur to fill the void. Of course the agreement in, and of itself, means nothing - as noted elsewhere popularity does not equal correctness, however it's a data point which exists, and in some cases is useful.
- Terretta 16y ago> Since I can't see your score, and you can't see mine, I honestly have no idea at this point whether more people agree with you than with me... When this thread is referenced to a week from now there is no way to see what sort of agreement occurred with either one of us. It's almost as though the future reader would need to form an opinion... for themselves.
- hernan7 16y agoComment sparklines?