reversing the negative status he had acquired. I would judge that he has above average status now.
I’ve actually had above-average karma pretty much since the site began, so I wonder what definition of “status” you’re using here. Status as perceived by what group, as ranked among what other group?
I’ve actually had above-average karma pretty much since the site began, so I wonder what definition of “status” you’re using here. Status as perceived by what group, as ranked among what other group?
Would you say that your recent contributions have been met with more appreciation than some of the earlier ones? If I recall correctly you mentioned in a recent post that you put effort into adapting your communication style to fit this audience. This has paid off and my perception is that your claims are being attributed more authority now than they were in the past.
A rough indication of your status could be, for example, by how many threads there are in which every pjeby comment is downvoted. I expect most pjeby comments to be upvoted or remain neutral now. This is some indication of higher status. That someone else makes a positive post referring to your work rather than a negative one disrespecting it is also an indication of higher status.
(All of which just means that I disagree with BindBreaker’s estimation of your status at this particular time.)
The last time I really checked (which was back in the early days), you had a far higher than normal proportion of posts with negative karma, which is the main thing that I use to evaluate a poster’s status. In general I find total karma to be unreliable because karma seems generally linked to post count (in the old days, this link was quite direct).
However, looking back now I see that your recent comments appear to have been much more generally appreciated. I am not as active as I would like and therefore haven’t seen many of these comments. This was quite an interesting discovery, as it made me aware of a greater need to evaluate status in the present state and account for shifts over time, so thanks, I guess.
The last time I really checked (which was back in the early days), you had a far higher than normal proportion of posts with negative karma, which is the main thing that I use to evaluate a poster’s status. In general I find total karma to be unreliable because karma seems generally linked to post count (in the old days, this link was quite direct).
Back when there was no limit to the number of downvotes one account could make, someone—either several people or one person with multiple accoutns—went through his comment history and systematically downvoted every post. (I inferred this at the time from the fact that the number of downvotes—particularly for out-of-the-way replies and meta stuff—was too consistent. And possibly other evidence I don’t recall, which would’ve come from noticing large shifts in karma at once.)
Yeah, when your karma drops 50-100 points in an hour or so, and it’s by almost exactly the number of comments you’ve made in the last week or so, and it happens every week or so, it’s pretty strong evidence of a systematic downvoting campaign.
Pjeby has re-branded himself here, reversing the negative status he had acquired. I would judge that he has above average status now.
Ouch. That sounds painful. ;-)
I’ve actually had above-average karma pretty much since the site began, so I wonder what definition of “status” you’re using here. Status as perceived by what group, as ranked among what other group?
Would you say that your recent contributions have been met with more appreciation than some of the earlier ones? If I recall correctly you mentioned in a recent post that you put effort into adapting your communication style to fit this audience. This has paid off and my perception is that your claims are being attributed more authority now than they were in the past.
A rough indication of your status could be, for example, by how many threads there are in which every pjeby comment is downvoted. I expect most pjeby comments to be upvoted or remain neutral now. This is some indication of higher status. That someone else makes a positive post referring to your work rather than a negative one disrespecting it is also an indication of higher status.
(All of which just means that I disagree with BindBreaker’s estimation of your status at this particular time.)
The last time I really checked (which was back in the early days), you had a far higher than normal proportion of posts with negative karma, which is the main thing that I use to evaluate a poster’s status. In general I find total karma to be unreliable because karma seems generally linked to post count (in the old days, this link was quite direct).
However, looking back now I see that your recent comments appear to have been much more generally appreciated. I am not as active as I would like and therefore haven’t seen many of these comments. This was quite an interesting discovery, as it made me aware of a greater need to evaluate status in the present state and account for shifts over time, so thanks, I guess.
Back when there was no limit to the number of downvotes one account could make, someone—either several people or one person with multiple accoutns—went through his comment history and systematically downvoted every post. (I inferred this at the time from the fact that the number of downvotes—particularly for out-of-the-way replies and meta stuff—was too consistent. And possibly other evidence I don’t recall, which would’ve come from noticing large shifts in karma at once.)
Yeah, when your karma drops 50-100 points in an hour or so, and it’s by almost exactly the number of comments you’ve made in the last week or so, and it happens every week or so, it’s pretty strong evidence of a systematic downvoting campaign.