If I may add something, I wish users occasionally had to explain or defend their karma votes a bit. To give one example that really confuses me, currently the top three comments on this thread are:
a critical comment which was edited after I criticized it; now my criticism is at ~0 karma, without any comments indicating why. This would all be fine, except the comment generated no other responses, so now I don’t even understand why I was the only one who found the original objectionable, or why others didn’t like my response to it; and I don’t remotely understand the combination of <highly upvoted OP> and <highly upvoted criticism which generates no follow-up discussion>. (Also, after a comment is edited, is there even a way to see the original? Or was my response just doomed to stop making sense once the original was edited?)
another critical comment, which did generate the follow-up discussion I expected
(You’ve done good work in this post’s comment section, IMO.)
I wish users occasionally had to explain or defend their karma votes a bit
Maybe if a comment were required in order to strongly upvote or strongly downvote? As someone who does those things fairly often, I wouldn’t hate this change. Sitting here imagining a comment I initially wanted to strongly upvote but didn’t because of such a rule, I feel okay about the fact that I was deterred, given this site’s standards.
Or maybe a 1 in 3 chance that a strong upvote will require a comment.
If I may add something, I wish users occasionally had to explain or defend their karma votes a bit. To give one example that really confuses me, currently the top three comments on this thread are:
a clarification by OP (Duncan) - makes sense
a critical comment which was edited after I criticized it; now my criticism is at ~0 karma, without any comments indicating why. This would all be fine, except the comment generated no other responses, so now I don’t even understand why I was the only one who found the original objectionable, or why others didn’t like my response to it; and I don’t remotely understand the combination of <highly upvoted OP> and <highly upvoted criticism which generates no follow-up discussion>. (Also, after a comment is edited, is there even a way to see the original? Or was my response just doomed to stop making sense once the original was edited?)
another critical comment, which did generate the follow-up discussion I expected
(EDIT: Have fixed broken links.)
(You’ve done good work in this post’s comment section, IMO.)
Maybe if a comment were required in order to strongly upvote or strongly downvote? As someone who does those things fairly often, I wouldn’t hate this change. Sitting here imagining a comment I initially wanted to strongly upvote but didn’t because of such a rule, I feel okay about the fact that I was deterred, given this site’s standards.
Or maybe a 1 in 3 chance that a strong upvote will require a comment.