3 ms·
Your last suggestion seems to make things less democratic understandably, but how would it be implemented? Weighted votes based on karma. Or restrict the numb
by jamesbritt 16y ago
Your last suggestion seems to make things less democratic understandably, but how would it be implemented?
Weighted votes based on karma. Or restrict the number of votes a user can cast based on karma or account age.
A problem with these kinds of things is determining what does or does not work and picking up on unintended side-effects, and doing so in a timely manner.
For example, if "young" accounts have very limited votes available will new users be less likely to stick around long enough to become more active voters? How long would it take to see this? What if by the time you recognize an undesired side effect you've already sent the site down the road of ruin (or something)?
For example, how long will pg keep comment vote hidden? How many people have found this to be sufficiently detrimental that they have, or soon will, leave HN and not come back?
How do you craft meaningful site experiments like this while keeping risk to a minimum?
- Joakal 16y agoI suggest similar to Reddit's anti-spam mechanism, fuzz the voting but give the impression that karma is somewhat important.
- andreaja 16y agoMaybe all we need is 'bad, average, good, great' to be shown alongside the comment. Or something along the lines of what slashdot do with allowing you to vote for comments as 'insightful' or 'funny' etc.
- bullseye 16y ago>> if "young" accounts have very limited votes available will new users be less likely to stick around long enough to become more active voters? I suppose that depends on whether or not they are on the site to read submitted news articles and comments or to play the voting and karma game. I rarely vote (or comment for that matter), but I get value from the content. For that reason, I have continued to consistently visit the site for a couple of years.