I don’t understand why this comment is downvoted and I want to go on record to say it wasn’t me. I appreciate when people tell me why they downvote my posts.
I definitely did expect mixed reactions to the original post. I’ll be honest and say that I’m surprised that people keep downvoting it to levels that I associate with malicious trolls, rather than let it stay hidden at −5 which seems appropriate for a failed attempt at humor. But it doesn’t really matter, it would take much more than negative reactions to a joke to stop me from making Less Wrong great again :)
Probably because the poster formerly known as Eugine_Nier (and by many, many other names) -- who was banned from LW but keeps coming back with new accounts—has taken a dislike to me and is downvoting most of my comments, in some cases multiple times with sockpuppets. (My 30-day karma is currently at −159/42%, which means something like +420-579, and I think almost all of that −579 is Eugine.) His usual practice at the moment seems to be to downvote just enough to ensure that everything I post is at 0 or −1.
He has some other frequent targets, such as NancyLebovitz and OrphanWilde; if you see something from one of them with an inexplicably negative score, that may be why.
I appreciate when people tell me why they downvote my posts.
I’m at fault for not saying it so for the sake of honestly, my main problem with these kind of posts is that despite being amusing, they don’t add much to the site. After a certain amount they actively harm the site and the quality of the humor would also deteriorate and would also replace possible quality posts. (Oppourtunity cost?)
The reason I’ve mentioned Reddit in my comment is that Reddit looks nice on paper, but from my experience I’ve often faced an issue where I’ll go to a subreddit, look for the ‘top’ posts and think there’s going to be a bunch of useful stuff in that specific endeavor only to find too many posts that aren’t even funny and take up 25% or more of the whole list of things. It feels annoying to spend time that ends up being a wasted effort.
I’ll be honest and say that I’m surprised that people keep downvoting it to levels that I associate with malicious trolls, rather than let it stay hidden at −5
It was already negative when I saw it, so I neither up- nor downvoted. I suspect the title catches more attention than the normal not-bad-but-not-helpful post, so even when it passed −5, people were drawn to look at it, and when they saw the content they downvoted without noticing the current score.
Actually, I wonder how many LW voters think of it as expressing an opinion (I want to support or dis-support this), and how many think of it as sending a signal (I want the author to change behavior). I suspect the former are more likely to add votes even if the score’s already clear, and the latter to vote only if they think the current score is insufficient.
I thought this was funny. Apparently other people didn’t.
I downvoted the post even though some of it made me laugh: I thought it was funny but not the kind of funny I want to see more of on LW.
(There are lots of things I enjoy but would not want to see more of on LW.)
I don’t understand why this comment is downvoted and I want to go on record to say it wasn’t me. I appreciate when people tell me why they downvote my posts.
I definitely did expect mixed reactions to the original post. I’ll be honest and say that I’m surprised that people keep downvoting it to levels that I associate with malicious trolls, rather than let it stay hidden at −5 which seems appropriate for a failed attempt at humor. But it doesn’t really matter, it would take much more than negative reactions to a joke to stop me from making Less Wrong great again :)
Probably because the poster formerly known as Eugine_Nier (and by many, many other names) -- who was banned from LW but keeps coming back with new accounts—has taken a dislike to me and is downvoting most of my comments, in some cases multiple times with sockpuppets. (My 30-day karma is currently at −159/42%, which means something like +420-579, and I think almost all of that −579 is Eugine.) His usual practice at the moment seems to be to downvote just enough to ensure that everything I post is at 0 or −1.
He has some other frequent targets, such as NancyLebovitz and OrphanWilde; if you see something from one of them with an inexplicably negative score, that may be why.
I’m at fault for not saying it so for the sake of honestly, my main problem with these kind of posts is that despite being amusing, they don’t add much to the site. After a certain amount they actively harm the site and the quality of the humor would also deteriorate and would also replace possible quality posts. (Oppourtunity cost?)
The reason I’ve mentioned Reddit in my comment is that Reddit looks nice on paper, but from my experience I’ve often faced an issue where I’ll go to a subreddit, look for the ‘top’ posts and think there’s going to be a bunch of useful stuff in that specific endeavor only to find too many posts that aren’t even funny and take up 25% or more of the whole list of things. It feels annoying to spend time that ends up being a wasted effort.
It was already negative when I saw it, so I neither up- nor downvoted. I suspect the title catches more attention than the normal not-bad-but-not-helpful post, so even when it passed −5, people were drawn to look at it, and when they saw the content they downvoted without noticing the current score.
Actually, I wonder how many LW voters think of it as expressing an opinion (I want to support or dis-support this), and how many think of it as sending a signal (I want the author to change behavior). I suspect the former are more likely to add votes even if the score’s already clear, and the latter to vote only if they think the current score is insufficient.