Thank you very much for this. I agree, it does seem like this way, people will end up getting a bunch of karma even for bad criticisms. Which would defeat the whole point of the points system.
I’m not sure I fully understand “So I would rather make sure that the bottom half of criticism gets an increasing potential for negative karma impact, by applying a weight on the upvote points starting from 1 for the median criticism, and progressing towards 0 for the worst criticism. (goodness can be measured as unweighted votes divided by number of votes.)”
I think there’s a lot of merit in affecting karma points just for the action of criticism and voting. Perhaps 1 karma for every criticism that has net positive votes? And perhaps 1 karma for the first 5 votes, 25 votes, 125 votes etc?
“For users in high karma range I would engourage to do much criticising and especially voting. For this reason I would apply a constant monthly karma reduction on them which can only be undone by sufficient karma collected through criticising and voting.” This is really interesting—we’ve been talking about ideas such as -perhaps after some time karma dissolves or turns into a different form of karma that doesn’t give weight—or create ways to spend karma(perhaps to give a criticism a stronger upvote/downvote?)
Let me explain this suggestion of mine: “So I would rather make sure that the bottom half of criticism gets an increasing potential for negative karma impact, by applying a weight on the upvote points starting from 1 for the median criticism, and progressing towards 0 for the worst criticism. (goodness can be measured as unweighted votes divided by number of votes.)”
I explain on an example. There are 800 criticisms arrived in Januar 2024, in total. all have their upvote/downvote based points (let us say as of 15 Feb), let me call these “raw points”. We put them in the order of increasing raw points. The worst let be −5, the 100th 5, the the 400th (the middle one) 25, the top one 110. Now a multiplier “m” is calculated for the bottom 400 criticisms, it will be 1-(400-x)/400 , where x is the rank of the criticism, so x=1 for the worst one, x=100 for the 100th one.
Now, for example, the worst criticism had raw point −5, and this was calculated as a sum of upvote—downvote points (raw = up—down), let us assume total upvote points 10, total downvote 15, so −5 = 10-15. We now apply the multiplier : final points = m*up—down. In this example, final points = (1-399/400)*10 − 15 = −15. So the final point will be approximately −15 because a heavy multiplier has decreased the value of the upvotes.
Thank you very much for this.
I agree, it does seem like this way, people will end up getting a bunch of karma even for bad criticisms. Which would defeat the whole point of the points system.
I’m not sure I fully understand “So I would rather make sure that the bottom half of criticism gets an increasing potential for negative karma impact, by applying a weight on the upvote points starting from 1 for the median criticism, and progressing towards 0 for the worst criticism. (goodness can be measured as unweighted votes divided by number of votes.)”
I think there’s a lot of merit in affecting karma points just for the action of criticism and voting. Perhaps 1 karma for every criticism that has net positive votes? And perhaps 1 karma for the first 5 votes, 25 votes, 125 votes etc?
“For users in high karma range I would engourage to do much criticising and especially voting. For this reason I would apply a constant monthly karma reduction on them which can only be undone by sufficient karma collected through criticising and voting.” This is really interesting—we’ve been talking about ideas such as -perhaps after some time karma dissolves or turns into a different form of karma that doesn’t give weight—or create ways to spend karma(perhaps to give a criticism a stronger upvote/downvote?)
Let me explain this suggestion of mine: “So I would rather make sure that the bottom half of criticism gets an increasing potential for negative karma impact, by applying a weight on the upvote points starting from 1 for the median criticism, and progressing towards 0 for the worst criticism. (goodness can be measured as unweighted votes divided by number of votes.)”
I explain on an example. There are 800 criticisms arrived in Januar 2024, in total. all have their upvote/downvote based points (let us say as of 15 Feb), let me call these “raw points”. We put them in the order of increasing raw points. The worst let be −5, the 100th 5, the the 400th (the middle one) 25, the top one 110. Now a multiplier “m” is calculated for the bottom 400 criticisms, it will be 1-(400-x)/400 , where x is the rank of the criticism, so x=1 for the worst one, x=100 for the 100th one.
Now, for example, the worst criticism had raw point −5, and this was calculated as a sum of upvote—downvote points (raw = up—down), let us assume total upvote points 10, total downvote 15, so −5 = 10-15. We now apply the multiplier : final points = m*up—down. In this example, final points = (1-399/400)*10 − 15 = −15. So the final point will be approximately −15 because a heavy multiplier has decreased the value of the upvotes.