just automatically clicking upvote as I start reading a post with an interesting first paragraph by someone whose name
Dude! You upvote the posts before you read them?!
This is probably pretty common, now that I consider it, but it seems like it’s doing a diservice to the karma system. Shouldn’t we upvote posts that we got value out of instead of ones that we expect to get value out of?
just automatically clicking upvote as I start reading a post with an interesting first paragraph by someone whose name
Internet voting experiences very different from your own…
My LW upvoting policy is that every once in a while I go through the big list of everything I’ve read, grep for LessWrong posts, look through the latest ~50 entries and decide to open them and (strong) up/downvote them based on how they look, a few months in retrospect.
My guess is you’re the only person in the world who does this, but also this is better than what everyone else is doing and maybe I should start doing it
Maybe the vote up / down option could be moved to after the body of the post? Does seem like an awkward set of design considerations between wanting people to see the current score before reading, and not split the current score from the vote buttons or duplicate the score, and I bet Habryka has thought about this already.
I doubt moving buttons is sufficient, you probably need a popup on upvote only: “hey, our scroll counter algorithm thinks you didn’t read the whole article. Please take a moment to be sure you really don’t want to do that before you upvote!”
I have done it for more than one post this month. I wonder if it’s in part because I upvote partway through reading sometimes and normally feel pretty accurate that I’ve noticed being less accurate this month (of course, one can always retract an upvote made in haste).
Dude! You upvote the posts before you read them?!
This is probably pretty common, now that I consider it, but it seems like it’s doing a diservice to the karma system. Shouldn’t we upvote posts that we got value out of instead of ones that we expect to get value out of?
Internet voting experiences very different from your own…
My LW upvoting policy is that every once in a while I go through the big list of everything I’ve read,
grepfor LessWrong posts, look through the latest ~50 entries and decide to open them and (strong) up/downvote them based on how they look, a few months in retrospect.My guess is you’re the only person in the world who does this, but also this is better than what everyone else is doing and maybe I should start doing it
Upvotes communicate to your future self, to future others, to current others, to the post’s author, and to the site’s promotion algorithm.
Voting a few months out tells me you’re mostly interested in #1 and #2 from that list, while I’m I’m pretty big on the last two.
Maybe the vote up / down option could be moved to after the body of the post? Does seem like an awkward set of design considerations between wanting people to see the current score before reading, and not split the current score from the vote buttons or duplicate the score, and I bet Habryka has thought about this already.
I doubt moving buttons is sufficient, you probably need a popup on upvote only: “hey, our scroll counter algorithm thinks you didn’t read the whole article. Please take a moment to be sure you really don’t want to do that before you upvote!”
I have done it for more than one post this month. I wonder if it’s in part because I upvote partway through reading sometimes and normally feel pretty accurate that I’ve noticed being less accurate this month (of course, one can always retract an upvote made in haste).