21–30 of 33 posts
I think a good idea would be to treat karma the same way that tennis rankings are counted: Only the past 52 weeks are counted. So if you gain 1000 karma in a year, then don't participate, your karma will be 0. That will encourage continual good behavior.
You assume that karma encourages good behavior. If that were the case, then I think this would be a good idea.
I think a good idea would be to treat karma the same way that tennis rankings are counted: Only the past 52 weeks are counted. So if you gain 1000 karma in a year, then don't participate, your karma will be 0. That will encourage continual good behavior.
Tennis rankings are based on physical form. Physical form is something much more likely to change year to year than intellectual form.
Someone might be out of date with the latest topics, consensus from the community, etc but it doesn't imply their thinking apparatus or world view has dramatically altered.
I think a good idea would be to treat karma the same way that tennis rankings are counted: Only the past 52 weeks are counted. So if you gain 1000 karma in a year, then don't participate, your karma will be 0. That will encourage continual good behavior.
If that's what you're gunning for, it's a great idea. What's popular is only dependent on your users and their tastes, and this can change over time.
I'd prefer to see words being attached to comments instead of numbers. "Funny", "Insightful", "Accurate", and their opposites could be the method of rating, with "leader boards" showing the funniest, most insightful etc.
The notion of me as a user being "worth" #### points would vanish, and it would be replaced with a general "run4yourlives: slightly funny, not often accurate" descriptor based on the ratings of my peers.
Slashdot tried this, but they kept linking it back to numbers, which I think is where it failed. The idea should be to remove the notion of a numerical worth altogether.
I think the only place a decay function makes sense is in providing historic views of the leaderboard.
The thing is, if you've only got 3 karma, and someone downvotes you, that's a big deal. But if you've got 3000 karma and someone downvotes you, it's not. Maybe a vote should result in a 1% gain/loss.
On the other hand, it probably doesn't matter that much :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You assume that karma encourages good behavior. If that were the case, then I think this would be a good idea.
I couldn't agree more. Karma encourages karma getting behavior. Sometimes that overlaps with good.
It's also slightly more difficult because what constitutes good behavior isn't always black and white and isn't even always agreed upon.
To be honest, I think the up/down notion of karma is the problem. I'd prefer to see words being attached to comments instead of numbers. "Funny", "Insightful", "Accurate", and their opposites could be the method of rating, with "leader boards" showing the funniest, most insightful etc. The notion of me as a user being "worth" #### points would vanish, and it would be replaced with a general "run4yourlives: slightly f…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why should people work so hard to gain something that is crumbling into dust all around us? Like money which will decay with inflation, or perhaps the regard of people who will be dust in a few decades? > If karma is constantly going down anyway it will confuse the issue If that's a problem, the site can provide the 1st derivative (ignoring decay). A bit like music charts ("at number 10, up 5, it's..."). Some sites…
Then again, I don't see what the utility of decaying karma is personally. It smacks of "what have you done for me lately". I think it's OK to respect people for past glories. Incidentally, this is one of the reasons why I don't participate on Perlmonks. There are a lot of people there that have "been around forever" and answer questions as though it's 1999. I really enjoy reading the "don't use Moose, it's bloat" thr…
OK - I can now see a benefit of favouring recent contributors. It helps stop ossificiation.