I was reading it as a response to my thing, which Rafael complained about yesterday, probably among other things. (I still owe a response to that comment, I’ll get to it in the next few days hopefully.) I agree that that post of mine got more karma than it deserved, and certainly agree that karma is somewhat divorced from value on lesswrong (and also everywhere else on the internet). My current opinion is that I’m happy that I wrote and published it—good use of a few hours. Again, I’ll read that comment soon-ish, see if I change my mind ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It’s definitely not a response to your post! I mean, yes I do think the post is an example of the pattern, but your posts in general are not, and it’s also not the most egregious example, the front page is not exactly filled with takes on this particular topic.
Im terms of being directly causally linked to me getting annoyed enough to write the short form, the other post I just complained about playes a much bigger role, and is a much more central example. But I’d still dispute that the shortform is a response to that. This is a complaint I’ve had for months and could have written at any point.
Don’t really want to name examples because it would single out individual authors. That’s why I didn’t include any in the first place.
I don’t think it is good to have your vote as a function of the current karma value, except in very special cases. One is negative karma quick takes, another one is with the impossible condition that most people in LW uses a distributed cooperation scheme that can make the karma value converge.
Otherwise, if everyone try to vote to make the post the “fair valuation” (which can be different per person):
It will just make you try to change your vote every so often
It makes algorithmic adjustments work less well. I would hope that LW eventually uses some impression-weighted karma value for the frontpage (unsure if currently being used), rather than everyone trying to use their own internal algorithm, which would make such adjustments inaccurate.
I mostly agree, with an exception for posts/comments that are already negative or close to zero.
I see a comment I think is useless/unpleasant/bad, and I think about downvoting it. I see its currently sitting at −10 and dont vote because I dont want to pile on even harder against that person. But, if the same comment had been at +20 i would have thought ‘what, really? Well, downvote’.
If I like something I dont let its current karma effect my voting.
Not sure I disagree, but could you give some example?
I was reading it as a response to my thing, which Rafael complained about yesterday, probably among other things. (I still owe a response to that comment, I’ll get to it in the next few days hopefully.) I agree that that post of mine got more karma than it deserved, and certainly agree that karma is somewhat divorced from value on lesswrong (and also everywhere else on the internet). My current opinion is that I’m happy that I wrote and published it—good use of a few hours. Again, I’ll read that comment soon-ish, see if I change my mind ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It’s definitely not a response to your post! I mean, yes I do think the post is an example of the pattern, but your posts in general are not, and it’s also not the most egregious example, the front page is not exactly filled with takes on this particular topic.
Im terms of being directly causally linked to me getting annoyed enough to write the short form, the other post I just complained about playes a much bigger role, and is a much more central example. But I’d still dispute that the shortform is a response to that. This is a complaint I’ve had for months and could have written at any point.
Don’t really want to name examples because it would single out individual authors. That’s why I didn’t include any in the first place.
Lol. I liked your post, but did not upvote it. I think a fair valuation of that post is 35 karma.
I’ve also observed a trend where putting in a lot of effort tends to get less engagement than low effort posts.
But still don’t feel like that’s a recent trend.
I don’t think it is good to have your vote as a function of the current karma value, except in very special cases. One is negative karma quick takes, another one is with the impossible condition that most people in LW uses a distributed cooperation scheme that can make the karma value converge.
Otherwise, if everyone try to vote to make the post the “fair valuation” (which can be different per person):
It will just make you try to change your vote every so often
It makes algorithmic adjustments work less well. I would hope that LW eventually uses some impression-weighted karma value for the frontpage (unsure if currently being used), rather than everyone trying to use their own internal algorithm, which would make such adjustments inaccurate.
I mostly agree, with an exception for posts/comments that are already negative or close to zero.
I see a comment I think is useless/unpleasant/bad, and I think about downvoting it. I see its currently sitting at −10 and dont vote because I dont want to pile on even harder against that person. But, if the same comment had been at +20 i would have thought ‘what, really? Well, downvote’.
If I like something I dont let its current karma effect my voting.
Fwiw I made a post/question/poll about this once (like whether you should vote based on total karma).