If C had read “If you think this shouldn’t be a top level post, upvote this comment and downvote the parent.” then it would have worked out fine.
That is, suppose ten people vote, 8 pro and 2 con.
P, in that case, would have 8 upvotes and 2 downvotes = 6 karma; C would have 2 upvotes and 8 downvotes = −6 karma; Net karma to dorrika = 0.
That system does work, but I find it less informative. Under that system, if you come back a day later and find that P and C have karma 2 and −2, then you don’t know if a) only one person thinks it should be top-level and the rest don’t care or b) 15 people think it should be top-level but 14 think it should stay in discussion.
True. Karma scores on posts have the same dynamic—if the score is 2, I don’t know if that reflects indifference or ambivalence—and I sometimes find myself caring.
That system does work, but I find it less informative. Under that system, if you come back a day later and find that P and C have karma 2 and −2, then you don’t know if a) only one person thinks it should be top-level and the rest don’t care or b) 15 people think it should be top-level but 14 think it should stay in discussion.
True. Karma scores on posts have the same dynamic—if the score is 2, I don’t know if that reflects indifference or ambivalence—and I sometimes find myself caring.