This comes across as a bit passive-aggressive with a bit of the standard “if you downvote me, I win” sort of symptom which is common among people who are either set in their ways or just trying to troll.
I consider this to be a problem with reputation systems rather than with the people who raise that point.
I think his point is absolutely valid. What he is saying is that reputation systems, like the one used on Less Wrong, allow for an ambiguous interpretation of the number they assign to content. That downvotes mean that he is objectively wrong is just one unlikely interpretation, given the selection pressure such reputation systems cause and the human bias towards group think.
I find the interpretation scheme “net downvotes mean more people want less content like this than want more content like this; net upvotes mean the reverse” to be fairly unambiguous.
Sure, it would be nice to have an equally unambiguous indicator of something I care about more (like, for example, the objective wrongness of a statement). Reputation systems aren’t that. Anyone who believes they are, is mistaken. Anyone who expects them to act as though they were and pays attention will be disappointed.
There are millions of other things that would be nice to have that reputation systems aren’t, also.
I consider this to be a problem with reputation systems rather than with the people who raise that point.
I think his point is absolutely valid. What he is saying is that reputation systems, like the one used on Less Wrong, allow for an ambiguous interpretation of the number they assign to content. That downvotes mean that he is objectively wrong is just one unlikely interpretation, given the selection pressure such reputation systems cause and the human bias towards group think.
I find the interpretation scheme “net downvotes mean more people want less content like this than want more content like this; net upvotes mean the reverse” to be fairly unambiguous.
Sure, it would be nice to have an equally unambiguous indicator of something I care about more (like, for example, the objective wrongness of a statement). Reputation systems aren’t that. Anyone who believes they are, is mistaken. Anyone who expects them to act as though they were and pays attention will be disappointed.
There are millions of other things that would be nice to have that reputation systems aren’t, also.