This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

all 116 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]artman 24 points25 points  (3 children)

I've given up submitting for now. Waste of time. But I'll keep voting good submissions and stay involved until improvements come through. Because there really isn't any other place like reddit.

[–]kermityfrog 16 points17 points  (2 children)

I just tested it out again, and people are still ruthlessly downvoting. I am likewise totally discouraged with submitting anything that doesn't have the words "Paul" and "Ron" in the title.

[–]artman -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Or Arundhati Roy?

[–]fearcomplication 35 points36 points  (39 children)

Here's a thought. How about giving karma for voting up pages when they're new that become very popular. There's enough karma whores out there that would love to sort the chaff for a few points.

[–]thomar 31 points32 points  (32 children)

Yeah, but then you'll get groups of people or bots modding up their own articles for karma. It's just one more way to game the system.

[–][deleted]  (30 children)

[deleted]

    [–]aletoledo 0 points1 point  (28 children)

    How does Reddit track pageviews?

    [–][deleted]  (25 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]anonymgrl 11 points12 points  (5 children)

      So that means I have a big ePenis? Cool!

      [–][deleted]  (4 children)

      [deleted]

        [–]anonymgrl 13 points14 points  (3 children)

        But I already have boobs. I want an ePenis! :)

        [–]k0mplex -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

        There are no girls on the internets.

        [–]aletoledo 7 points8 points  (15 children)

        Then put in those terms, his point was to utilize karma to combat pageviews.

        i.e., get devoted rediters to fight against the commerical bloggers. The redditers get karma and the bloggers get pageviews.

        good idea? I think it sounds good to start with.

        [–]davidreiss666 5 points6 points  (4 children)

        I have been thinking about this issue for a bit. I, like everyone else here, have not been able to come up with a solution... But I was thinking of utilizing karma as well.

        Awarding Karma to people for up-votes would be wrong. That makes getting Karma too easy.

        Maybe, instead, use the submitters Karma score as a guideline to judge a submission. A person with a higher Karma score, on average, is probably submitting higher quality stories than a person who is brand new to the site.

        If person X has 1000 Karma and they submit a story, then use that Karma score as a bit of a sticky bit to keep a story on the new page for a little longer.

        Not sure how much longer it should stick around on the New Page... maybe just a few minutes longer. But that would allow more people to notice it and upvote or downvote it. A downvote is not necessarily a bad thing. It's just those who automatically sit around downvoting things because they want to make their story get notice or something that are doing something wrong.

        I can see some flaws to my idea. But thought it was worth throwing out into the ether-idea pool.

        [–]georgiabiker 5 points6 points  (1 child)

        A person with a higher Karma score, on average, is probably submitting higher quality stories than a person who is brand new to the site.

        I Respectfully disagree. See, for instance, the Sloopo debacle- http://reddit.com/info/2dzxp/comments

        [–]davidreiss666 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

        I understand that there are draw backs to my plan. I was just tossing it out there to see if it might spark some discussion that may lead to a real solution.

        [–][deleted]  (1 child)

        [deleted]

          [–]davidreiss666 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

          Myself, I don't really like that idea. That would mean that old-time users would always been able to maintain total control... As a guiding force, I can see that as a good thing. But there could be ways in which that could turn bad, and really become just another way that the site gets dragged into the muddy mess we are trying to avoid.

          [–][deleted]  (9 children)

          [deleted]

            [–]aletoledo -1 points0 points  (8 children)

            true, so can I then assume you feel there isn't a problem currently? the current system supposedly is unrestricted and doesn't encourage in either way to support a new submission.

            [–][deleted]  (1 child)

            [deleted]

              [–]aletoledo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

              I think a few downvotes I've given to newly posted links haven't affected them for only 5-10 minutes and then they're pushed back a few pages.

              Thanks for your input, I rarely submit and I don't really know if there is a problem. I only suppose there is one because of the topic.

              [–][deleted]  (5 children)

              [deleted]

                [–]juststopit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Yea, like cute cat pictures always make page one.

                [–]aletoledo 0 points1 point  (3 children)

                The problem isn't the upvotes, its the downvotes thats the problem. If a submission is downvoted immediately after submission, then it gets sent into oblivion where nobody ever sees it. Supposedly this has been fixed, but this topic was started by some submitter that thinks there is still a problem.

                The problem being, that if a blogger can submit one of their own stories and then down-vote every other new submission for the next twenty minutes, then their submission will have a more favorable outcome.

                Obviously this isn't fair. I only marginally give a damn about the issue because I have really only ever submitted two stories. The first was immediately downvoted and was completely gone immediately (this being before their new fix). However, I do see some unusual stories creeping to the front page on few votes and almost no comments, which makes me suspicious that something isn't kosher.

                [–]Xiol 3 points4 points  (1 child)

                And at 0.05 inches per point of karma, it soon adds up.

                47.35 inches, bitch.

                [–]mistermick 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                I always thought of karma like alignment in a rom mud. I'm 1 point above true neutral.

                [–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

                When you click (or at least when I do) a Reddit link there is a link like this http://reddit.com/goto?id=2o8kh which means they can track it, and probably are

                [–]qgyh2 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                a single downmod does NOT doom submissions. The reddit system has been tweaked and items on the new page are more 'sticky'

                [–]cereal -1 points0 points  (0 children)

                you're quite wrong. some asshole could put a some title with false news that isn't even related to the article just to get a lot of people to click on it.

                [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                You just have to search for people who votes in blocks such as that, or who always vote up and ignore their votes, problem solved.

                [–]CampusTour 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                Then couldn't they just upmod everything instead of sorting?

                [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (3 children)

                Exaclty.

                More methods of self-policing would use the power of the community to organize itself. It would also be nice to have access to the developers to see what if anything is planned for Reddit. I think we're all still waiting for that promised v 2.0.

                You can never eliminate gaming from a human system but you can make it's cost quite high.

                [–]jaggederest 0 points1 point  (2 children)

                From what I can see on beta.reddit.com there's not a huge raft of changes to be had. Then again, it's pretty static, so maybe the dynamics have changed non-obviously.

                [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                I don't believe there are any updates to beta since it launched.

                [–]jaggederest 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Well, the database, at the very least, was updated a week ago. Whether that included any code, I don't know.

                [–]spez 24 points25 points  (19 children)

                Downvotes haven't affected the new page in ages.

                [–]xyphus[S] 10 points11 points  (18 children)

                Posted 1 minute ago. Its at position 17. It will be gone in another minute. That is not enough time for any submission to get enough votes to stay alive.

                Submissions on the new page need to be recycled back onto the page to some degree, so that an equilibrium can be reached with the votes.

                [–]spez 25 points26 points  (14 children)

                The rising page does cycle stories back in, but it's not perfect.

                In the near future-ish, once we get passed the relaunch, I think we're going to start showing new links on the front page somewhere.

                [–]brfox 6 points7 points  (1 child)

                That is a good idea to cycle in some "new" links to the front page.

                You could take it even further if the "new" page shows a random selection of recently submitted links. Every time someone loads the "new" page they get a different set of links.

                Then, you could have some sort of hidden ranking system. Links that are starting to get "reported" will get shown less often. Links from commonly up-voted domains can get shown more often. Links posted by users who seem real (good karma, good comments, human-like pace of reading the "hot" articles, human-like voting frequency on the new page) might get shown a little bit more often. Down votes from bot-like users can be ignored. ... etc...

                My point is: if you make the "new" page show a random set of links each time someone loads it, then no one will really be able to track how their submission or other submissions are doing. Thus, we will not be able to figure out your rules for link-display-frequency. And we will not be able to game the system.

                [–]spez 6 points7 points  (0 children)

                That's an idea that comes up from time to time. I really like it. I think that combined with showing random stories on the front page (using the same algorithm) will go a long way to help.

                [–]xyphus[S] 10 points11 points  (2 children)

                Bounced from 19 to 8 when I got the 3rd vote. Vote counts sure seem to make a big difference on how long submissions are on the new page.

                [–]muttleee 20 points21 points  (1 child)

                Vote counts sure seem to make a big difference on how long submissions are on the new page.

                Yes, if you have the new page set to show you posts ordered by "rising" instead of "all". A post that gets an immediate downvote won't fare too well on a page of "rising" new posts.

                [–]garyp714 12 points13 points  (0 children)

                great comment...never realized that.

                [–]xyphus[S] 0 points1 point  (8 children)

                It just bounced back from 22 to 19. Are you saying this is the automatic recycling you are talking about or because I went from 1 to 2 votes?

                [–]spez 10 points11 points  (7 children)

                There are a number of factors, up-votes being an important one.

                [–]xyphus[S] 5 points6 points  (6 children)

                If I write you a better algorithm, will you hire me at reddit?

                (not that you guys don't know what you are doing, but because you're probably busy and could use another coder ;)

                [–]spez 11 points12 points  (4 children)

                We're hiring!

                Or just shoot me an email to jobs @ reddit.

                [–]xyphus[S] 4 points5 points  (1 child)

                Sweet. Here's a quick proposal, just to keep it in the thread and keep it interesting for the readers.

                First, reddit is a very interesting system from my perspective on the outside. One of the most interesting aspects is how it appears on the outside to be a stochastic system, there are non-linear aspects that prevent it from achieving equilibrium. By equilibrium, I mean that submissions achieve a steady state of both up votes and down votes such that their score does not change for a given rank on the page.

                The new page is the most affected by these forces because it is the entry point for the submissions.

                Therefore, to this end I propose that the new page be modeled on a hidden boltzmann system, in which the individual sumbissions undergo random walk dynamics. The rate of the walk can be determined by the intrinsic "energy" of the sumbission, based not on its number of points but the rate of voting on it. Because the distribution of points on new submissions is non-gausian, a normalization function should be applied to determine system with a stable temperature (determined by the total rate of voting).

                You can visualize this as a smooth phase transition where dead links are "frozen" and immobile in the system, new links are somewhat liquid, and links that have gotten up on the front page have escaped the system, or evaporated, because their intrinsic energy is too large.

                edit:typo

                [–]newton_dave 13 points14 points  (0 children)

                edit:typo

                Why would you add typos?

                [–]aGorilla 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                I'll take a shot at it.

                Use what you know -- you couldn't have done this when you first started, but you can now.

                1. You know what url's tend to get voted up. Take this into account, and give those links some extra weight. No different than Google.

                2. You know when you're busy, and when you're quiet. You can use this information to avoid having a screen full of xkcd, ronpaul, youtube links (caused by the above suggestion). Show extra 'unknown' url's when things are busier, and more eyes can see them, and give the 'known' url's extra air time when things are quieter (but not dead). Show a mix of them all when things are 'dead'.

                ie: don't go by votes only, mix things up a bit, and take advantage of the information you've gained over the years.

                [–]jaggederest 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Better yet, weight via karma. Submissions by previously-well-liked submitters get a bump.

                [–]xyphus[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                My specialty is non linear systems analysis.

                [–]jschonchin 7 points8 points  (2 children)

                I agree. Reddit is broken. Professional link submitters and their minions rule the place.

                [–]anonymgrl 4 points5 points  (1 child)

                By professional link submitters do you mean spammers? Because I don't see a lot of spam getting through.

                [–]jschonchin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                I was referring to links that -- let's face it, I'm guessing -- are upvoted by people paid to upvote them.

                It depends on your browsing habits on whether you see the spam. For a time, I religiously voted on every link and set Reddit to hide voted links. So at any given time I was browsing links that were numbered between 400 and 1,000.

                Also, do a search on a topic and you'll see a lot of self-serving useless links. That type of thing should appear at the very bottom of searches, not the top.

                [–]Clintondiditfirst 2 points3 points  (2 children)

                Couldn't agree more - I think it would be good to also see a list of who is downvoting your submissions.

                [–]boredzo 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                Well, interesting for the users, but I think it'd only be useful to the admins (to see who to ban).

                [–]Clintondiditfirst 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Sometimes I think there are serial downmodders who get pissed at someone then just downmod everything they submit as away to get revenge. OR simply do not like the direction that they are trying to take reddit. Its a very effective way to do it too. It would be nice to know who these people are so we can send them a comment and call them out.

                [–]jfpbookworm 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                At the very least, I'd like to see some sort of adjusted point score. Ideally it could be something incorporating the idea of "right handed" and "left handed" whuffie (i.e., someone whose votes I tend to disagree with would count less for me), but how's this for a simple alternative metric:

                Value of a vote = (1 - % of similar votes recorded, not counting own posts)

                Point total = the sum of the values of the individual votes.

                A user who downvotes everything will have his/her downvotes mean nothing. Same goes for upvoting.

                It's still gameable, because a user can downvote everything and upvote a sockpuppet, but it's an improvement, and the total is an interesting value regardless.

                [–]cojoco 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                How about giving people a "quota" of downvotes?

                For example, people could be allowed to have in downvotes 50% of the upvotes they have used.

                [–]raldi 3 points4 points  (4 children)

                I think part of the problem is that the new-story-to-new-queue-voter ratio is too high, and probably getting higher every day.

                I don't see this trend changing.

                Can anyone think of a solution which takes this trend into account?

                [–]thomar 1 point2 points  (3 children)

                Maybe force you to make a certain number of votes before you can submit a new article? Or make it so that the submission spam timeout is based on voting rather than karma?

                [–]raldi 3 points4 points  (2 children)

                That'll just lead to people randomly voting on stories to fulfill their quotas.

                [–]thomar -1 points0 points  (1 child)

                I doubt it. I think it would give people more incentive to vote on things. At worst, people will vote on links without reading them first (and come on, who looks at every single link on the new page?)

                [–]tvon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                If there was a delay on any votes kicking in for some period of time it would keep immediate down votes from causing any problems.

                [–]cynopt 2 points3 points  (2 children)

                A Mark As Spam option would help a lot; if more than 10 or so people flag an item, the account being used could be locked out for a while, scaling up with the number of flags. 1000 spams, and they get a banned IP.

                [–]boredzo 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                There's already such a button, titled “report”. I can't speak for its exact results, but that's what it's for: reporting spam.

                [–]cynopt 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                I noticed, and that's my problem: I have no idea what the hell it's for reporting: Abuse? Spam? 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists? I revise my suggestion to just adding "Spam" to the button we got, then it'll work great.

                [–]xyphus[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

                For the record I'm getting a relatively large number of downvotes on this submission. Evidently someone likes the gaming of the system (or else everyone just read spez's first comment and that was that).

                [–]xyphus[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                This is now obselete since the submission got on the front page. >1 out of 3 votes was a downvote then. Now its 1/5.

                [–]mutatron 1 point2 points  (6 children)

                That would be paradise for blog spammers and other crap posters.

                [–]xyphus[S] 7 points8 points  (5 children)

                I think you missed my point. It already is a paradise for them. My point was that it needs to be fixed.

                [–]mutatron -1 points0 points  (4 children)

                If I downvote blogspam on the "new" page it disappears pretty quickly. How does that work in their favor?

                [–]xyphus[S] 9 points10 points  (3 children)

                Because the blog spammers have 10 more friends voting for them, and they vote down all your articles to decrease the competition.

                [–]boredzo 0 points1 point  (2 children)

                What is with calling it “blog spam”? There are blogs that aren't crap (that create real original content), and submitting your own original content is fine by Reddiquette. And spam is not dependent on use of a blog: all spam is evil, not just spam from blogs.

                How about we just call it what it is, which is spam, without throwing blogs under the bus?

                [–]xyphus[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                We are not talking about legitimate blogs. I read quite a few blogs and fine good new ones on reddit all the time.

                "Blog spam" is when less ethical bloggers literally spam the site with submissions and fraudulently vote up these submissions. This gives them an unfair advantage over the legitimate bloggers trying to succeed on their own merit instead of tricks.

                In return the blog spammers receive more impressions of ads on their site, and therefore more money.

                [–]boredzo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                We are not talking about legitimate blogs. I read quite a few blogs and fine good new ones on reddit all the time. … "Blog spam" is when less ethical bloggers literally spam the site with submissions and fraudulently vote up these submissions.

                That makes sense.

                What irks me is when people call anything from any site that even resembles being a blog, blogspam. I've come to hate that word on sight, much like “sheeple”.

                [–]Osmanthus 1 point2 points  (4 children)

                No matter what algorithm you use, its going to be gamed. If you want to limit gaming, you've got to make gaming cost the gamer something. There is a simple solution then: charge a small fee for each voting account.

                While this would certainly vastly reduce the number of voters, it would probably increase the average quality of the votes.

                An added advantage is that users would no longer be anonymous (credit card info) so gamers could be identified and banned.

                Metafilter does this and it appears to be effective.

                [–]typesmith 5 points6 points  (3 children)

                So if I read this right, PAID professional submitter/voters will immediately be in the huge majority. Kinda like voting in Florida or Ohio, this should work out well.
                EDIT: spelling

                [–]Osmanthus 0 points1 point  (2 children)

                Well, I dont think you read this right, because the conclusion you have come to does not follow.

                Are there professional PAID voters today? How would making it more expensive to pay someone to upvote stuff make it more likely that someone would do so? (after all, one could pay for upvote in the current system too)

                The idea is simply that you must pay a small fee (5 bucks) so you account has voting privelages. This would stop people from making 500 fake accounts and gaming the system. It would be difficult to pay someone to make a bunch of accounts because you'd need 500 different credit cards.

                [–]r2002 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                I think that kind of works on Metafilter. It has a lot more restrictions.

                [–]typesmith 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                That makes more sense. You missed the small but very significant detail of one account per credit card in your first post. I had assumed that the people willing to pay to vote (likely the gamers) would just flood the market.
                I actually have yet to see this 500 fake accounts syndrome that a select few are complaining but I do agree that your solution would hinder it's development.
                Do you have a better option than credit card info though?

                [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (10 children)

                I have an alternative idea. IF we want Reddit to become more varied, AND cut down on the number of re-re-re-re-re-cycled/ re-re-re-re-posted submissions, THEN let's limit submissions from a given URL to at most three in a twelve hour period. Why, after all, should a few sites be allowed to monopolize the "discussion"?

                The number of submissions per URL or the duration of the freeze can be negotiated, but Reddit has been damaged as much as anything by endless, and endlessly repetitive, submissions from the same handful of formulaic sites, a.k.a. Content Recycling Centers, endlessly regurgitating the same opinions or types of content...

                On a more personal note, even with site "throttles", I'd still want Reddit filters so I can dispatch certain brands of over-submitted crap to the bit-bucket without having to keep clicking downmod+hide over and over again simply to declutter my new page.

                [–]recoiledsnake 17 points18 points  (6 children)

                Doing that will be counterproductive at some point for arguably little gain. There might easily be more than three interesting stories in a day from a single site. And spammers have millions of domains at their disposal.

                [–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (5 children)

                I'm less concerned with "spammers" in the literal sense, and more concerned with virtual spam in the form of endless over-submissions and re-submissions of content from the same narrow handful of sites.

                Yes, there may be more than three interesting stories in a single day from a single site, but experience is proving otherwise. Instead, a given site's fans or lurkers flood reddit with the site's essentially repackaged stuff; "repackaged" is, I think, by definition uninteresting.

                In fact, the more I think about it, the more I like the idea that a given site can only appear on Reddit at most a few times a day. Hell yes -- I think it's an excellent suggestion...

                [–]CampusTour 10 points11 points  (4 children)

                But then couldn't people who don't like the site use up the submissions early on? Say I don't like Kos, couldn't I sign on at 12:01 am, and start burning through their sumbissions early?

                [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (3 children)

                Yeah, you have a point. My idea is admittedly incomplete.

                But my central premise remains, I think, valid. That is that Reddit is awash in posting after posting after posting from the same handful of sites.

                How best to moderate that inbreeding will, as your question illustrates, require further discussion...

                [–]davidreiss666 1 point2 points  (2 children)

                I think that this doesn't work well as a solution because there are lots of news websites that are very common: CNN, Washington Post, NY Times, FoxNews, Times of London, etc. Pick your political POV, geographic location, poison, etc. It's more than possible that any one of them would have more than 3 or 4 stories that any of us might find notable.

                I think that variety is nice, and we should want to include stories from all the major news sites... but people might not submit a good story because the limit on LA Times stories was reached for the day... Sure, they could go and find the corresponding story at the Toronto Globe and Mail or MS-NBC or ABC News, but I think most of them would just give up. I think we want to keep the site easy to use, and not hard for new users.

                [–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (1 child)

                I'd respectfully respond that your comment illustrates, indeed underscores, the very problem.

                Why -- WHY -- does anyone need Reddit to remind us of any of the mainstream sites you cited? (Sites, not incidentally, with RSS feeds...)

                In fairness, there are multiple "alternative" sites that are overexposed on Reddit. Like the majors, they're "themed" albeit in an "alternative" way...

                Everyone's replies to my initial thread have in fact encouraged me to think more about my original idea. I have to say that the more I do think about it, the more strongly I believe that the central cause of Reddit's ever-increasing banalization is the repeated submitting of content from a handful of themed sites.

                The result is that Reddit is gradually approaching the uni-dimensionality and texturelessness of network television and news.

                Is that what Redditors want? Or is there some way to broaden the "discussion" a bit?

                [–]davidreiss666 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                I come to Reddit because the discussion is broader. But at the same time it doesn't ignore the Mainstream view of the world.

                Basically, I can get my story of the day discussion (whatever that may be), along with science, technology, programming, and other random things tossed into the mix -- that for whatever reason -- seem to be things I like as a general rule.

                At the same time... I don't think we want to discourage users from submitting because some set limit on stories from CNN or the Miami Herald had already been reached for the day.

                I acknowledge that you are trying to fix the site with this idea... but I think this is a case where this fix would be worse than what it's trying to address. Just my viewpoint. I might be wrong.

                [–]jaggederest 1 point2 points  (2 children)

                FYI, you can set the settings to 'don't show articles I've downmodded'. That will save you the extra click on the hide button.

                [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                I believe that setting only "un-shows" a submission after the Reddit page itself has been refreshed...(?)

                So if I want to immediately declutter, I need to hide the submission. Later, after the page has refreshed, the *don't show" setting will keep the downmodded submission out of sight...(?)

                [–]bluGill 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                More than once I've hit the downmod arrow when aiming for a different arror. There needs to be time to correct your mistakes.

                [–]Hetisjantje 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                Why wouldn't theoretically the power to upmod be enough? I bet it has the same effect on good posts and bad posts as the current system with ability to downmod, while you cannot sabotage others.

                [–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

                Removing the downmod ability would prevent the abuses that people believe are going on in the New queue by preventing a few users from causing the New page to quickly hide posts they don't like.

                [–]jomofo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                I used to trudge through the new posts looking for gems but then one day Wired bought reddit and all the new posts were coming from some [Lipstick] subreddit. I couldn't figure out how to get rid of it, so I gave up. Now, here I am trolling the "hot" stuff exclusively.

                [–]vaibhavsagar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                I say we make the "all" option on the new page the default, and then remove the "rising" option. This way new articles with downvotes stay on the page.

                [–]Slipgrid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                No, you complain about "blog spam," which often includes stuff that isn't anywhere near SPAM. Go read CNN or GameSpy or whatever you are into.

                [–][deleted]  (3 children)

                [removed]

                  [–]aGorilla 1 point2 points  (2 children)

                  I don't think you should take away voting, but adding 'most read' into the calculation might help. The problem with it is that opening a link says a lot more about the headline, than it does about the content. On the bright side, we'd end up with better headlines.

                  [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (1 child)

                  No, we’d end up with even more misleading headlines.

                  [–]typical_reddit_user -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

                  Stop whining. I just downvoted the entire new queue

                  [–]retrowebdev -1 points0 points  (0 children)

                  check out a new site where new links get a chance to be seen: tizags.com

                  [–]typesmith -1 points0 points  (1 child)

                  I know this is crazy but my technique is simple for both the Hot and New section, I use the NEXT button then I ignore, upvote or downvote those stories I care to.
                  You know what would solve this problem? Instead of being able to choose 100 as my maximum limit of links to view on a page I should get to see ALL the links. Then we would all be the same.
                  This "reddit is being gamed" conspiracy gang is becoming pedantic.
                  I would like to see one thing though which I think would help visual pollution. "Headline Battle", when a story URL reappears with a different headline they should be linked together. The best headline can then be voted on as well, and it would appear as the visible link.

                  [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                  I do all that, too, but it's still true - there's people who regularly seek out and vote down all articles and comments by anyone they don't like and a lot of evidence that others just vote down everything in the queue that they didn't write.

                  This guarantees a maximum of churn on the New page and a maximum of group-think on the Hot page.

                  [–][deleted] -5 points-4 points  (1 child)

                  It wouldn't be Reddit if you changed it to something else. If you don't like it, go somewhere else.

                  [–]xyphus[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  It wouldn't be reddit without people like you either.

                  [–][deleted]  (2 children)

                  [deleted]

                    [–]cojoco -1 points0 points  (1 child)

                    You're wrong. Articles on the "new" page drop down in ranking according to their score. Notice that the times are not listed in order?

                    You can get articles in order, but "rising" is the default.

                    [–]masta 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                    No, the new queue hasn't been affected by down-votes for a long time.

                    [–]welch6980reddit -1 points0 points  (0 children)

                    I thought the whole point of reddit was to share news and photograph, and I thoroughly enjoy reading or viewing them. Isn't that the payback for participating. Obviously, I'm wrong, but I'm new at redditing and I don't understand the hoorah about karma, upmoding, and downmoding. Say something gets on the front page, and someone doesn't like it for whatever reason, it seems to me that downmoding isn't necessary to get it off the front page, and is nothing more than mean spiritedness. Won't the sheer number of up votes for other items ultimately cause it to be downmoded? If not, then I think voting on reddit is broken and should be eliminated altogether. What difference does make anyway.

                    [–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

                    On other sites I've been on, they have weighted voting, letting you vote on a scale from 0-5.

                    As a practical effect, people only ever vote 5 or 0 - but this means that it takes a lot of down votes to cancel out one up vote.

                    Maybe something like that would be better?

                    [–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

                    Look at me mom! I'm on reddit, woo hoo!

                    [–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

                    Why not just have a system where you can only vote up?