pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @k00b OP 4 Jan 2022 \ parent \ on: [RFC] Ranking SN posts meta
Yes I think as usage increases, posts getting missed is less likely. However, it doesn’t go to zero. It’s a well know problem on HN/Reddit that good posts get missed depending on time of day or day that they get posted.
Anyhow, I just meant to say I won’t ship WoT with penalties to start because good posts certainly do get missed now. People hardly upvote new stuff as is.
Fair enough, so maybe the ratio of viewers to posts is what determines how likely something is to be missed?
If so, Stacker News should actually get closer to zero quality posts missed than Hacker News, because under a Web of Trust system bad content is costly (to one's wallet and reputation), while there are no reputation or financial penalties on Hacker News.
People will be less likely to post random junk on Stacker News, raising the ratio of viewers to posts.
Also, Stacker News can start paying users fees generated by the platform in accordance to their reputations, so there will be a direct incentive for people to participate honestly.
Crucially, the loss of reputation points matters here - otherwise, people could just mindlessly upvote random posts for 1 sat, get a few extra reputation points along the way when one of their upvoted posts does well, and then collect additional fees with their reputation gains... even if 90% of their upvotes are junk.
Without some potential to lose reputation points, there is no incentive to vote honestly, and the web of trust model falls apart.
The reputation of any person in any IRL community goes up and down over time, there needs to be some mechanism that punishes actions the community doesn't like for this approach to work.
reply
I agree. There will need to be penalties eventually.
reply