Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ELO Everything

eloeverything.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 106 posts

Re: ELO Everything

#92

Post by dr_pyser »

screye wrote: post #53
montroser wrote: post #14

Ruiners of all good things incoming... It's cool, but dealing with bad-faith participants is what is really difficult about these types of exercises. It works great until the hurt people find it, and then the hurt people hurt people -- perpetuating their sadness unto others by upvoting the bad things.

Naah, it's simple things like these that are fun. Choosing Rice instead of Einstein was the highlight of my day.

I mean, billions of people have lived because of rice, so I don’t think it’s necessarily even a bad take.

Re: ELO Everything

#93

Post by jmholla »

bee_rider wrote: post #81
lwansbrough wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think higher rating is an endorsement. The question is only: which do you rank higher? I think Adolf Hitler ranks quite highly on notoriety, especially if the comparison is inherently notorious (ie. Hitler vs. Jeffrey Epstein.) So I'm not sure Hitler ranking highly is in bad faith.

I think a more likely answer is that people are not taking it very seriously, and are just picking Hitler as a troll answer.

Yea. Now the leader is Rupert Murdoch.

Re: ELO Everything

#94

Post by bee_rider »

graypegg wrote: post #90
Laremere wrote: post #21

See also Tom Scott's video "1,204,986 Votes Decided: What Is The Best Thing?" https://youtu.be/ALy6e7GbDRQ In it he mentions that he kept the site up for only a short amount of time, in part to prevent anyone from writing a bot which could game it. Unfortunately, that has not been the case with Elo Everything, which has a clearly gamed leader board.

A gamed leaderboard is kind of interesting in the same way a doping-only olympics would be interesting.

I wonder what the bots are doing.

I guess the optimal strategy would be to target the leader you want to knock out with losses to the current last-place entry, right?

I guess that last place entry would change pretty quick though.

Re: ELO Everything

#95

Post by ninjanomnom »

ctvo wrote: post #64
lwansbrough wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think higher rating is an endorsement. The question is only: which do you rank higher? I think Adolf Hitler ranks quite highly on notoriety, especially if the comparison is inherently notorious (ie. Hitler vs. Jeffrey Epstein.) So I'm not sure Hitler ranking highly is in bad faith.

> So I'm not sure Hitler ranking highly is in bad faith. I think they may be ranking Hitler the artist or Hitler the leader surely. It can't possibly be the more simple explanation of the internet being full of trolls who think anonymous graffiti is funny. Why is it only on HN that this sort of contortion happens?

ELO in most contexts is a sort of "strength" rating so I decided when doing a few dozen that I would choose whichever had more impact on history. Or to put it another way, I was choosing the thing that would cause the most differences if it didn't exist. In my case I got Hitler vs Electricity so the latter is the obvious choice but anyone else using the same criteria as me has perfectly good reason to choose Hitler over some random sport team or most other individuals.

Though yes it's the internet, so it's probably mostly people doing it for the funny.

Re: ELO Everything

#96

Post by [deleted] »

schappim wrote: post #78
montroser wrote: post #14

Ruiners of all good things incoming... It's cool, but dealing with bad-faith participants is what is really difficult about these types of exercises. It works great until the hurt people find it, and then the hurt people hurt people -- perpetuating their sadness unto others by upvoting the bad things.

What? You’re telling me that Rupert Murdoch #1 with 1337 matches is not a coincidence[1]? [1] https://imgur.com/a/mQFsg7x

[deleted]

Re: ELO Everything

#98

Post by [deleted] »

bee_rider wrote: post #94
graypegg wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A gamed leaderboard is kind of interesting in the same way a doping-only olympics would be interesting.

I wonder what the bots are doing. I guess the optimal strategy would be to target the leader you want to knock out with losses to the current last-place entry, right? I guess that last place entry would change pretty quick though.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN