I sort of agree, but this tends to be holding the system of voting stable and assumes you’re making tradeoffs along the efficiency frontier. There are probably ways to pull the voting system sideways such that you probably can optimize for more of what you care about that’s currently being captured in this notion by “contrarian”ism that exists as a result of compressing ourselves down into a simple, generalized up/down vote system.
This is still good advice, though, with respect to the current system.
Yeah. Upvotes/downvotes act as reward/punishment respectively. So the problem with voting to express agreement/disagreement is that you are rewarding people for expressing common views and punishing them for expressing uncommon views. Which can lead to an echo chamber.
But it’s still valuable to know whether people agree or disagree! So I suspect the ideal voting system would separate out the “more of this”/”less of this” axis from the “agree”/”disagree” axis. You could have people fill out text boxes anonymously to explain their “more of this”/”less of this” votes, then do text clustering once you had enough filled-out text boxes, then figure out the top 10 reasons people choose “more of this”/”less of this” and replace the text boxes with dropdowns. To guard against misuse, you could weight dropdown selections from users who tend to agree with trusted moderators more heavily.
I sort of agree, but this tends to be holding the system of voting stable and assumes you’re making tradeoffs along the efficiency frontier. There are probably ways to pull the voting system sideways such that you probably can optimize for more of what you care about that’s currently being captured in this notion by “contrarian”ism that exists as a result of compressing ourselves down into a simple, generalized up/down vote system.
This is still good advice, though, with respect to the current system.
Yeah. Upvotes/downvotes act as reward/punishment respectively. So the problem with voting to express agreement/disagreement is that you are rewarding people for expressing common views and punishing them for expressing uncommon views. Which can lead to an echo chamber.
But it’s still valuable to know whether people agree or disagree! So I suspect the ideal voting system would separate out the “more of this”/”less of this” axis from the “agree”/”disagree” axis. You could have people fill out text boxes anonymously to explain their “more of this”/”less of this” votes, then do text clustering once you had enough filled-out text boxes, then figure out the top 10 reasons people choose “more of this”/”less of this” and replace the text boxes with dropdowns. To guard against misuse, you could weight dropdown selections from users who tend to agree with trusted moderators more heavily.