4 ms·
I think this hits almost bullseye for the reasons of this change, but I'd add the White House along with the brands who'd rather have their dislikes hidden. Ho
by _v7gu 4y ago
I think this hits almost bullseye for the reasons of this change, but I'd add the White House along with the brands who'd rather have their dislikes hidden.
However, shadowbanning is for cowards. Would you also ban the people who only cast likes without any dislikes? Both groups have the same signal-to-noise ratio and can be equally harmful.
- heleninboodler 4y ago> Both groups have the same signal-to-noise ratio I kinda doubt this, to be honest. In real life, I discount the opinions of people who only ever have negative things to say. Seems as though serial dislikers might deserve the same treatment.
- _v7gu 4y agoEmotionally, I really get it. We feel positive towards positive thoughts and vice versa for negative ones. But in the context of information, a "recommender" that recommends everything is equivalent to one that recommends nothing: both are worthless (ie can't provide any new information)
- heleninboodler 4y agoYeah, I think you get zero information from someone who only upvotes or only downvotes, whereas you get some signal from people in the center.
- qwerpy 4y agoCounterpoint: highly partisan voters who upvote anything from their team and downvote anything from the other, regardless of quality.
- heleninboodler 4y agoAccepted.
- IshKebab 4y agoI'm pretty sure the White House would just disable ratings?