pull down to refresh

hot -> lit, recent -> new, eh?

Also doing zaprank -> sats in top/search

1001 sats \ 0 replies \ @plebpoet 11 Feb

lit

reply
110 sats \ 17 replies \ @anon 11 Feb

focused on naming? build what users want. add sort by controversial

reply
112 sats \ 16 replies \ @k00b 11 Feb

let me have my brief moment of fun anon

add sort by controversial

nah, i'm going to remove negative zaps from showing. cons outweigh the pros.

reply

I don’t know what your criteria is (if you can explain it, I’d appreciate it) but hiding information doesn’t seem right to me. Why not hide the positive zaps too?

reply
33 sats \ 10 replies \ @sox 11 Feb

Up until a couple of days ago nobody could see negative sats next to their name. You can still see downsats in the details section:

reply

I thought that part was gonna be removed too!

reply
237 sats \ 8 replies \ @sox 11 Feb

Not that I know of! The real problem is that displaying negative sats doesn't really accomplish anything good.

Do they make someone feel bad? Yes, uselessly. Maybe the poor guy didn't even post something that bad but got negative sats plastered next to their name.
And then we get back to the comic I posted down below, the poor guy will get even more downzaps because trolling and... yeah you get me, just not nice.

reply

I don’t see any problem with it. Having negative sats doesn’t mean I’m a bad person, it just means the content is “shit.” People are way too sensitive these days!

reply
45 sats \ 6 replies \ @sox 11 Feb

I hear you, but I still think that we shouldn't twist the knife when someone is already bleeding ^^

what's the cons?

reply
201 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 11 Feb

It makes discourse worse.

By studying four large comment-based news communities, we find that negative feedback leads to significant behavioral changes that are detrimental to the community. Not only do authors of negatively-evaluated content contribute more, but also their future posts are of lower quality, and are perceived by the community as such. Moreover, these authors are more likely to subsequently evaluate their fellow users negatively, percolating these effects through the community. In contrast, positive feedback does not carry similar effects, and neither encourages rewarded authors to write more, nor improves the quality of their posts. Interestingly, the authors that receive no feedback are most likely to leave a community. Furthermore, a structural analysis of the voter network reveals that evaluations polarize the community the most when positive and negative votes are equally split.

https://cs.stanford.edu/people/jure/pubs/disqus-icwsm14.pdf

reply
236 sats \ 1 reply \ @sox 11 Feb

It's a small change, but big enough to deter downzap bandwagoning. The hope is that a downzap always comes from a reaction to the content, not to the downzaps themselves.

reply

Why not hide the positive zaps too?

reply

👀

reply

1337

reply

How I imagine k00b in the morning.
Let's see how we gonna change SN today...

reply