3 ms·

I doubt keltranis is missing the issue. Instead let's assume reddit's devs know what's what think of a why. My guess is they want to fast bury spam. Spam in ol

by Danieru 13y ago

I doubt keltranis is missing the issue. Instead let's assume reddit's devs know what's what think of a why. My guess is they want to fast bury spam. Spam in old posts will have been deleted and thus old posts are more trustworthy. Voting brigades are a smaller risk than the constant flood of spam.

ketralnis 13y ago
No, spam doesn't have anything to do with it. And actually, older (high-scoring, anyway) links are more likely to have spam comments because the moderators aren't hanging around there anymore.
kennywinker 13y ago
I believe they have other, closed source, anti-spam measures. This might be the reason, but if it is 'tis a silly reason. If I understand correctly, it means that if 75% of people like a post, and 25% dislike it, that means it has a 25% chance of not being successful because the first vote is negative. Overall, this measure is effectively lowering the quality of all content on the site.
lnanek2 13y ago
Maybe you misread, the quote shows it is the intended behavior. They don't care about the number of votes, only if it is more up, equal, or more down. After that they care about age more. The article wants them to base it more on number of votes. You can tell from the parts about returning in whatever order the DB wants that they are going for speed and scalability as well. So more down voted posts being a certain way may not even matter to them as long as they are off the page.
SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
> Voting brigades are a smaller risk than the constant flood of spam. Are they? This behaviour allows one vote to bury a post. Is the "downvote brigade" risk really so small that you can hand it an opportunity like this?
samclearman 13y ago
If he has some justification for the formula to be as it is, why hasn't he shared it with us?

3 ms·

I doubt keltranis is missing the issue. Instead let's assume reddit's devs know what's what think of a why. My guess is they want to fast bury spam. Spam in ol

by Danieru 13y ago

ketralnis 13y ago
No, spam doesn't have anything to do with it. And actually, older (high-scoring, anyway) links are more likely to have spam comments because the moderators aren't hanging around there anymore.
kennywinker 13y ago
I believe they have other, closed source, anti-spam measures. This might be the reason, but if it is 'tis a silly reason. If I understand correctly, it means that if 75% of people like a post, and 25% dislike it, that means it has a 25% chance of not being successful because the first vote is negative. Overall, this measure is effectively lowering the quality of all content on the site.
lnanek2 13y ago
Maybe you misread, the quote shows it is the intended behavior. They don't care about the number of votes, only if it is more up, equal, or more down. After that they care about age more. The article wants them to base it more on number of votes. You can tell from the parts about returning in whatever order the DB wants that they are going for speed and scalability as well. So more down voted posts being a certain way may not even matter to them as long as they are off the page.
SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
> Voting brigades are a smaller risk than the constant flood of spam. Are they? This behaviour allows one vote to bury a post. Is the "downvote brigade" risk really so small that you can hand it an opportunity like this?
samclearman 13y ago
If he has some justification for the formula to be as it is, why hasn't he shared it with us?