Don’t post more than one comment in this thread. If you find more other-person comments you want to add, edit yours to include them.
I don’t understand the rationale for this. It seems contrary to the usual practice in threads of this type, where items are separated in order to allow voting on them individually.
I don’t understand the rationale for this. It seems contrary to the usual practice in threads of this type, where items are separated in order to allow voting on them individually.
I support your reasoning. There is no good reason to group by recommenter.
Mind you there is only one non-meta comment in the thread. It seems to have flopped for some reason.
New terms: hcomment for comments in this thread; o-comment for comments suggested by this thread.
What I figure is that if you like the o-comments, you can vote on them instead of the hcomments. I don’t know if this is a good idea, since it multiplies the effect of selection bias, but I figure comments don’t need two sets of karma scores. Talk about information cascades.
On the contrary, it seems to me that information cascades would be better avoided by separating out voting on the comments “where they occur” from voting on them as “nominees” in this thread.
I had assumed the purpose of this thread was to identify these comments so that they could be collected elsewhere (perhaps offsite) in a “List of Best LW Comments”, ordered by how they score in this thread.
I prefer Grognor’s way. Voting on comments in this thread should be based on the value added by comments in this thread. Basing voting on the value added by the original comments would just create an incentive for people to mass-repost the top comments feed.
I don’t understand the rationale for this. It seems contrary to the usual practice in threads of this type, where items are separated in order to allow voting on them individually.
I support your reasoning. There is no good reason to group by recommenter.
Mind you there is only one non-meta comment in the thread. It seems to have flopped for some reason.
New terms: hcomment for comments in this thread; o-comment for comments suggested by this thread.
What I figure is that if you like the o-comments, you can vote on them instead of the hcomments. I don’t know if this is a good idea, since it multiplies the effect of selection bias, but I figure comments don’t need two sets of karma scores. Talk about information cascades.
On the contrary, it seems to me that information cascades would be better avoided by separating out voting on the comments “where they occur” from voting on them as “nominees” in this thread.
I had assumed the purpose of this thread was to identify these comments so that they could be collected elsewhere (perhaps offsite) in a “List of Best LW Comments”, ordered by how they score in this thread.
I prefer Grognor’s way. Voting on comments in this thread should be based on the value added by comments in this thread. Basing voting on the value added by the original comments would just create an incentive for people to mass-repost the top comments feed.