331–340 of 729 posts
The Slashdot System
- Comments start at +1 and can range from -1 to +5 only
- Mod points are limited and distributed randomly as needed
- Only members with good karma are eligible for mod points
- Mod points must be used within 24 hours
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's kind of a "my amp goes up to 11" kind of thing, isn't it? You're just changing the label for "no votes either way."
No, it assigns a cost of 2 points to commenting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was thinking the same thing which is why I didn't mention the length idea. However... what if users over say 1 year and with a high comment average were exempted? To add to that, lionhearted posted a comment about inevitable site decline because of open membership and equally weighted voting. What if only accounts over 1 year could vote (or diminish their vote weight)? Wouldn't instituting a min. length requirement…
But there is something unsavoury about that sort of elitist/privilige system I think. Perhaps, however, the word-count restriction could apply only to the 'top-nodes' of the comment threads, ie. if you're replying to the submission itself. That way, things are started off on the right foot, and snidey one-liners never get upvoted to the top of the whole thread.
On your other point, I'm thinking that short unwanted quips can rear their ugly head anywhere along threads.
What about taking away downvoting? It would change the dynamic, at least. I suppose it doesn't solve the problem of stupid posts and comments being upvoted.
The comment flag button could be changed to really mean something; for instance: sufficiently flagged comments can stop collecting upvotes.
That wouldn't do anything currently. Only really atrocious comments get flagged, and they always have huge negative scores. Though of course if flagging had more effect, maybe more people would do it. Another thing I've considered is having specific types of flags on comments, and having them have different effects. E.g. there could be a flag for incivility, and if you got enough of those (maybe in proportion to your…
However, I don't see an algorithmic way to use flagging in such a situation. The new control mechanism would be subject to the same problems that led to the comment being upvoted in the first place.
I'd like to see the mods experiment with a more authoritarian approach. When a comment sucks, I want the mods to impose their will upon the populace, informing everyone that the comment sucks, regardless of its upvotes. Flags could play a role.
I feel like this would add some "drag" to the rate of change.
I'd suggest that there are more tiers to functionality than are currently in place. At the moment, after 500 points you're given the ability to downvote comments. Perhaps there should be additional barriers in place, such as this: 0 - Ability to comment on threads 50 - Ability to upvote comments 500 - Ability to downvote comments 1000 - Ability to submit articles/stories 2000 - Ability to downvote articles/stories et…