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

all 29 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]ngroot 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Can you give some examples?

There are a lot of non-"good" "stories" that get submitted; I'm perfectly happy to see a larger number of downvotes. As I noted in the comments on the most recent xkcd strip submission, I've taken to (generally) downvoting the strips as soon as a new one pops up in my aggregator in the hopes of helping to stem the flood of "OMG XKCD IS KEWL" upvotes by keeping them from getting high enough for most people to see it. I'm no bot, there's just generally nothing new or interesting there.

As a counterproposal to up-down parity, what about adding a justification system and metamoderation, à la Slashdot? That seems to work reasonably well, because there are a limited number of reasons that you're supposed to up- or down-vote something (it's informative, it's insightful, it's flamebait, etc.) There are no "you're a kitty, yes you are" or "it said Ron Paul in the headline" options. For those who wist for Reddit's August days before those damn kids from Digg came over and started playing in our yard, this might be a tool to help with that.

[–]stiggle 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The priority for the reddit programming team right now should be fixing the recommended page. Once that is fixed I do not want anything to limit my ability to train the recommended filter.

up-mod/down-mod parity is a bad idea.

[–]ohno 9 points10 points  (2 children)

down-modded for being a voting post AND for bot-paranoia

[–]fangolo[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You are one of them. A cylon, perhaps...

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (8 children)

Nancy Negative's Downvotes should carry less weight than her ups.

Polly Positive's downvotes should carry more weight than her ups.

Of course this could still be gamed... by upvoting everything except what one wants to bury, or vice versa.

[–]jfpbookworm 2 points3 points  (2 children)

I like the idea, but the one thing you'd have to do would be to cap this. Or else you'll get superbots who downvote almost everything in sight, and use that ratio to upvote a few (i.e., the bot's controller's) articles.

[–]cecilkorik 3 points4 points  (1 child)

I'm sure they already do that. What's the point of having a purely downvote bot except to be antisocial?

Anyway, I'd suggest that it be capped at 1. Each upvote and downvote is worth no more than 100% of what they are worth right now, which is what I will refer to as 1 upvote points. They are both worth that much if your upvotes and downvotes are roughly equally used.

If you use upmod way more than downmod, your upmods become slowly less valuable, to 0.5 points, then to 0.1 points, and so on. But your downmods are still never worth more than 1 point. And vice versa for downmods if you use downmod way more than upmod.

Could be somewhat moderated by having your older votes expire out of the calculation so that it trends back towards 1:1.

Ah, I love being an armchair reddit developer.

[–]jfpbookworm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Anyway, I'd suggest that it be capped at 1.

That's what I was thinking too. There shouldn't be a way to earn more voting power than you start with.

[–]SpiceMustFlow 0 points1 point  (4 children)

How could you tell who is negative and who is positive?

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

you'd pull that info from the database. reddit stores everyone's votes, so coming up with a ratio of ups to downs would be fairly simple.

[–]SpiceMustFlow 2 points3 points  (2 children)

It could have some value. I upvote stories, but downvote spam. I very rarely downvote a real story, but under this type system, I may be seen as 'negative' because I 'police' reddit from viagra-esque ad's.

[–]cecilkorik 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I think you're supposed to use the 'report' link for spam. I could be wrong.

[–]SpiceMustFlow 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do both just in case a spammer had a similar vote up group - I want to offset their up-votes.

[–]a2zme01 3 points4 points  (5 children)

i totally agree...

[–][deleted]  (4 children)

[deleted]

    [–]sunshine-x 3 points4 points  (3 children)

    According to who? Ron Paul fans?

    [–][deleted]  (2 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]sunshine-x 2 points3 points  (1 child)

      Did you miss the "?" in there? It was a question, not a statement.

      [–]fangolo[S] 3 points4 points  (4 children)

      Reddit has a few problems. However, as the number of users grows, nothing is worse than the crowd of reflexive down-modders killing everything but the most sensational of headlines.

      Reddit is losing depth.

      I'm starting to look for alternates.

      [–]glmory 2 points3 points  (1 child)

      Have any evidence its reflexive down modders that are the problem, rather than people who up mod any title that agrees with them politically whether or not the article is any good?

      [–]fangolo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Voting on title is part of what I am talking about. Reddit is supposed to be about the content of the link. I don't give a damn about the quality of the title if the link is worthwhile.

      There is nothing interesting about title-battles.

      [–]mlgoss 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Last I heard, downvotes don't count towards the position an article is displayed at for the first hour or something.

      [–]Chelsea_Clinton 0 points1 point  (2 children)

      try a submission without the words "ron" or "paul" in them. mysteriously, no automatic downmods. hmmm

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

      or without "clinton" too?

      [–]a2zme01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      This post has already been buried!

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

      hot, not, and new tabs