5 ms·

We are effectively saying that each user should generate an average comment score of 1 point per day to break even. Anything you make beyond 1 point is consider

by buff-a 15y ago

We are effectively saying that each user should generate an average comment score of 1 point per day to break even. Anything you make beyond 1 point is considered an excess return for the day. We then simply take the Sharpe ratio of the average daily excess returns. The resulting metric ensures that users are incentivized to make consistent, high-quality submissions and punishes one hit wonders and those who take a spray-and-pray approach. In my opinion, we want people to keep quiet until they have something meaningful to contribute to the conversation. The idea that making any post is a "return on investment" is nonsense.

SoftwareMaven 15y ago
Couldn't you solve that by increasing the "break even" score to whatever we think an "average" post should get? Spray a bunch of unvoted responses (technically, those are worth zero points of karma, I believe) and the average post is worth two, you will kill your ratio pretty quickly.
alanfalcon 15y ago
I completely agree. I think the submission makes an incorrect assumption that valuable users contribute regularly. Certainly regularity isn't baked in to any karma measures on HN right now, and I'd expect that's be design rather than a flaw to be corrected.
- eric-hu 15y ago
  I have to disagree...somewhat. Since Reddit is open source, I could create a copy right now that would have no content on it. Lets say I populated it with all of the old, highly rated posts. This would be valuable as a source of high quality content, but has less value to me because it lacks current events and interaction with other users. I said 'somewhat' because there clearly is a value in having high quality content, so I see it as a trade off. I think there's a market for both high-quality/low-volume sites as well as lower-quality/higher-volume sites.
- thesz 15y ago
  I second this and I should add that I often do a search on HN and upvote comments in quite old discussions. Just as a gesture of gratitude. Those OP measures don't account for that, I think.
onedognight 15y ago
As far as I can see, the formula gives no penalty for commenting infrequently. There is a penalty for commenting highly once and then poorly many times as compared to what you would get with an average.
- eric-hu 15y ago
  I believe there is under "A Better Metric" dx is the number of days the user is registered. If the user made one post and then stopped, his karma score would shrink over time as dx approaches infinity while the numerator remains constant. The numerator technically has an extra term for each successive day, but it looks like that additional term is 0 if no comments were made on that day.
  - gjm11 15y ago
    It's worse. The additional term is undefined (it's 0/0-1) for days with no comments.
    - eric-hu 15y ago
      I figured that was just a special case they didn't explain directly. The equation follows their description if you treat the 0-comment days as a 0 for the term in the parenthesis: people who post infrequently will see a shrinking karma.
- Udo 15y ago
  Yes, it does. At the end, the score is divided by the age of the account in days. Essentially, this formula is a treadmill forcing users post as much as they can just to keep their karma. It's a very bad idea that has no upside.
jdfreefly 15y ago
Agreed. I lurk...a lot. I rarely open my mouth. There was a short period where I looked to snipe with some witty comment, but I quickly out grew that. I've made one post and I am rarely finding things pertinent to the tribe that haven't already been posted, so instead I look for new interesting content here and only open my mouth when I think I have something valuable to add to an existing discussion. I think something like the proposed solution would leave a user like me out in the cold. I am by no means saying this objection should kill the idea, you gotta break a few eggs, and if I happen to be one of them, so be it. It should be given some thought though.
- PakG1 15y ago
  I'm in the same boat. I've noticed something interesting though. Back when I was commenting a lot more, I cared a lot more about my karma points. Now that I'm more of a lurker, I realize I don't keep track of my karma at all, nor do I really care about it anymore. So maybe actually, I don't care either way... but people like you and me do exist in terms of signal to comment volume ratio (at least, I hope my ratio's high :D).
  - sapphirecat 15y ago
    Likewise with lurking-until-valuable. If karma were converted to an incentive for daily engagement, that would be a strong disincentive for me to even log in. It changes the relationship from a friendly "it's okay if you contribute, however often you feel like" to "be here and be loud, or be screwed". (If I were changing HN, I'd love an option to replace the karma score with a reply inbox, so I don't have to poll my threads page. I'm trying to break myself of my post-and-run habits, of my general fear of defending my ideas, and of my overvaluation of karma.)

by buff-a 15y ago

SoftwareMaven 15y ago

Couldn't you solve that by increasing the "break even" score to whatever we think an "average" post should get? Spray a bunch of unvoted responses (technically, those are worth zero points of karma, I believe) and the average post is worth two, you will kill your ratio pretty quickly.

alanfalcon 15y ago

I completely agree. I think the submission makes an incorrect assumption that valuable users contribute regularly. Certainly regularity isn't baked in to any karma measures on HN right now, and I'd expect that's be design rather than a flaw to be corrected.

eric-hu 15y ago
I have to disagree...somewhat. Since Reddit is open source, I could create a copy right now that would have no content on it. Lets say I populated it with all of the old, highly rated posts. This would be valuable as a source of high quality content, but has less value to me because it lacks current events and interaction with other users. I said 'somewhat' because there clearly is a value in having high quality content, so I see it as a trade off. I think there's a market for both high-quality/low-volume sites as well as lower-quality/higher-volume sites.
thesz 15y ago
I second this and I should add that I often do a search on HN and upvote comments in quite old discussions. Just as a gesture of gratitude. Those OP measures don't account for that, I think.

onedognight 15y ago

As far as I can see, the formula gives no penalty for commenting infrequently. There is a penalty for commenting highly once and then poorly many times as compared to what you would get with an average.

eric-hu 15y ago
I believe there is under "A Better Metric" dx is the number of days the user is registered. If the user made one post and then stopped, his karma score would shrink over time as dx approaches infinity while the numerator remains constant. The numerator technically has an extra term for each successive day, but it looks like that additional term is 0 if no comments were made on that day.
- gjm11 15y ago
  It's worse. The additional term is undefined (it's 0/0-1) for days with no comments.
  - eric-hu 15y ago
    I figured that was just a special case they didn't explain directly. The equation follows their description if you treat the 0-comment days as a 0 for the term in the parenthesis: people who post infrequently will see a shrinking karma.
Udo 15y ago
Yes, it does. At the end, the score is divided by the age of the account in days. Essentially, this formula is a treadmill forcing users post as much as they can just to keep their karma. It's a very bad idea that has no upside.

jdfreefly 15y ago

Agreed. I lurk...a lot. I rarely open my mouth. There was a short period where I looked to snipe with some witty comment, but I quickly out grew that. I've made one post and I am rarely finding things pertinent to the tribe that haven't already been posted, so instead I look for new interesting content here and only open my mouth when I think I have something valuable to add to an existing discussion. I think something like the proposed solution would leave a user like me out in the cold. I am by no means saying this objection should kill the idea, you gotta break a few eggs, and if I happen to be one of them, so be it. It should be given some thought though.

PakG1 15y ago
I'm in the same boat. I've noticed something interesting though. Back when I was commenting a lot more, I cared a lot more about my karma points. Now that I'm more of a lurker, I realize I don't keep track of my karma at all, nor do I really care about it anymore. So maybe actually, I don't care either way... but people like you and me do exist in terms of signal to comment volume ratio (at least, I hope my ratio's high :D).
- sapphirecat 15y ago
  Likewise with lurking-until-valuable. If karma were converted to an incentive for daily engagement, that would be a strong disincentive for me to even log in. It changes the relationship from a friendly "it's okay if you contribute, however often you feel like" to "be here and be loud, or be screwed". (If I were changing HN, I'd love an option to replace the karma score with a reply inbox, so I don't have to poll my threads page. I'm trying to break myself of my post-and-run habits, of my general fear of defending my ideas, and of my overvaluation of karma.)