4 ms·
The interesting bit in the article for me was that if the account was required, and the lame-content posters were gone, the good-content posters also posted les
by gfosco 5y ago
The interesting bit in the article for me was that if the account was required, and the lame-content posters were gone, the good-content posters also posted less (seemingly, because someone else wasn't wrong on the internet.)
- asoneth 5y agoThat was indeed interesting, that "for every bad contribution prevented, seven good ones never happened". However, while it is easy to measure, I'm not convinced that "number of good contributions" is a valid proxy for "quality of discussion" or "quality of content". For example, some of those good contributions might have been repairing the damage made by bad ones. And on a less heated/combative forum, users may feel comfortable consolidating multiple small contributions into fewer but more well-thought out contributions. And perhaps even the good contributions that were prevented were (while good) on average lower quality than the ones that remained.