3 ms·

I've thought about this a lot. I really should start working on it. > 1. pseudo-anonymity, gives people freedom to speak their minds Making an influential acc

I've thought about this a lot. I really should start working on it. > 1. pseudo-anonymity, gives people freedom to speak their minds Making an influential account should be exceptionally difficult. All submissions and comments should be, by default, anonymous, with users only taking an identity when relevant (ie: if you're a scientist on something like r/askscience, or a developer on r/programming). Nobody should have to make a throwaway account to be anonymous, it should just be a flag on the server. Throwaway account comments should not be possible, you should need to build reputation to make a comment that is seen by most. > 2. moderation ensures people know that they are in a controlled space Moderation, if granted special powers, will always be taken over by "powerusers" with an agenda. Moderation should be done exclusively through comment and post scoring, not through individual named users. If downvoting and upvoting worked correctly, moderation would be entirely unnecessary. That's the whole point of curation, isn't it? My main idea is to take a known set of good voters (ie: myself, some friends, early contributors, etc.) who exclusively follow the etiquette and can pick a substantial post from a bad one, and then based on user similarity to the known good set, you can grant a multiplier or a decimation to those that seem to vote similarly or dissimilarity. Essentially, you'll have fractional voting/scoring. > 3. Ensures that spaces have a branding, shared identity between them but are not being controlled from without, but only within I don't like the idea of anyone being able to create a namespace. It fractures things too significantly and you get echochambers for each party or each viewpoint. The usenet hierarchy was better, and it should be combined with subscriptions to #tags to get more granularity for individual user interests.

ronsor 5y ago
> (1a) All submissions and comments should be, by default, anonymous, with users only taking an identity when relevant This honestly sounds awfully similar to 4chan. > (1b) Throwaway account comments should not be possible [...] build reputation to make a comment that is seen by most. Reddit is already sort of like this, honestly. That's why high karma accounts are often sold. > (2) grant a multiplier or a decimation to those that seem to vote similarly or dissimilarity. This will be slowly (or swiftly) shifted by brigading bots. > (3) I don't like the idea of anyone being able to create a namespace. It fractures things too significantly and you get echochambers for each party or each viewpoint. You'll still get echochambers for each viewpoint. There will just be fewer of them. Based on point 2, the majority will choose the viewpoints of the echochamber.
- nickysielicki 5y ago
  > [Anonymous by default] honestly sounds awfully similar to 4chan. That seems shallow to me, it's only true insofar as 4chan is a well-known forum that allows for anonymous posting. 4chan is ephemeral, the site I'm imagining is not. 4chan is image based, the site I'm imagining is not. 4chan doesn't have threaded comments, the site I'm imagining would. Most importantly, 4chan allows for anonymous posting that isn't tied to a central identity (there's nothing tying anonymous posts to tripcoded posts), the site I'm imagining would. There would be no throwaways, you would only be able to post anonymously on an account with a profile behind it. > Reddit is already sort of like this, honestly. That's why high karma accounts are often sold. As far as I know, there's no bias given to high karma accounts in terms of default comment sorting or post visibility. The only reason I can imagine that someone would purchase a high karma account is to use them to gain outsized influence by applying for mod positions on big subreddits. > [Vote biasing] will be slowly (or swiftly) shifted by brigading bots. If they can accurately upvote good content and accurately filter bad content, so what? They will never be able to get a bot into the good pool of known benevolent actors, and if they're always voting similarly to the known-good actors, then they're indistinguishable from good participants. Everything would be derived from being similar to the known-good actors, or similar to those that are most similar to known-good actors, and so on. > You'll still get echochambers for each viewpoint. There will just be fewer of them. Based on [the shifting of vote biasing by bots], the majority will choose the viewpoints of the echochamber. The pool of known-good (possibly paid) voters/editors should thwart this.

ronsor 5y ago

> (1a) All submissions and comments should be, by default, anonymous, with users only taking an identity when relevant This honestly sounds awfully similar to 4chan. > (1b) Throwaway account comments should not be possible [...] build reputation to make a comment that is seen by most. Reddit is already sort of like this, honestly. That's why high karma accounts are often sold. > (2) grant a multiplier or a decimation to those that seem to vote similarly or dissimilarity. This will be slowly (or swiftly) shifted by brigading bots. > (3) I don't like the idea of anyone being able to create a namespace. It fractures things too significantly and you get echochambers for each party or each viewpoint. You'll still get echochambers for each viewpoint. There will just be fewer of them. Based on point 2, the majority will choose the viewpoints of the echochamber.

nickysielicki 5y ago
> [Anonymous by default] honestly sounds awfully similar to 4chan. That seems shallow to me, it's only true insofar as 4chan is a well-known forum that allows for anonymous posting. 4chan is ephemeral, the site I'm imagining is not. 4chan is image based, the site I'm imagining is not. 4chan doesn't have threaded comments, the site I'm imagining would. Most importantly, 4chan allows for anonymous posting that isn't tied to a central identity (there's nothing tying anonymous posts to tripcoded posts), the site I'm imagining would. There would be no throwaways, you would only be able to post anonymously on an account with a profile behind it. > Reddit is already sort of like this, honestly. That's why high karma accounts are often sold. As far as I know, there's no bias given to high karma accounts in terms of default comment sorting or post visibility. The only reason I can imagine that someone would purchase a high karma account is to use them to gain outsized influence by applying for mod positions on big subreddits. > [Vote biasing] will be slowly (or swiftly) shifted by brigading bots. If they can accurately upvote good content and accurately filter bad content, so what? They will never be able to get a bot into the good pool of known benevolent actors, and if they're always voting similarly to the known-good actors, then they're indistinguishable from good participants. Everything would be derived from being similar to the known-good actors, or similar to those that are most similar to known-good actors, and so on. > You'll still get echochambers for each viewpoint. There will just be fewer of them. Based on [the shifting of vote biasing by bots], the majority will choose the viewpoints of the echochamber. The pool of known-good (possibly paid) voters/editors should thwart this.