I mean curi has now insufficient karma to post on the main page and his comments are generally heavily downvoted. People can disable viewing low karma comments, so popperclipping (whatever it means—did the old term “troll” grow out of fashion?) may not be a problem. Therefore I think that karma works.
Curi’s karma periodically spikes despite posting no significantly upvoted comments or any improvement in his reception. I suspect he or someone else who frequents his site may be generating puppet accounts to feed his comments karma (his older comments appear to have gone through periodic blanket spikes.) He’s posted main page and discussion articles multiple times after his karma has dropped to zero without first producing more comments that are upvoted, due to these spikes.
I asked matt if this could be confirmed, but apparently there’s only a very time-consuming method to gather anything other than circumstantial evidence for the accusation.
I asked matt if this could be confirmed, but apparently there’s only a very time-consuming method to gather anything other than circumstantial evidence for the accusation.
Jimrandomh had an idea for setting up a script that might help, maybe talk to him? In any event, it might be useful to have the capability to do this in general. That said, since this is only the first time we’ve had such a problem, it doesn’t seem as of right now that this is a common enough issue to really justify investing in additional capabilities for the software.
I believe that “popperclipping” is a play on words, a joke, alluding to a popular LW topic. Explaining it more might kill the joke.
I mean curi has now insufficient karma to post on the main page
Currently, on the main page, the most recent post under “Recent Posts” is curi’s The Conjunction Fallacy Does Not Exist. The comments under this are showing up in the Recent Comments column. Of the five comments I see in the recent comments column, three are comments under curi’s posts. That is a majority. As of now, then, it appears that curi continues to dominate discussion, either directly or by triggering responses.
Damn, I thought it was in the discussion. Then, I retract my statement that karma works. Still, what’s the explanation? Where did curi get enough karma to balance the blow from his heavily downvoted comments and posts? I have looked onto two pages of his recent activity where his score was −112 (-70 for the main page post, −42 for the rest). And I know he was near zero after his last but one main page post was published.
I mean curi has now insufficient karma to post on the main page and his comments are generally heavily downvoted. People can disable viewing low karma comments, so popperclipping (whatever it means—did the old term “troll” grow out of fashion?) may not be a problem. Therefore I think that karma works.
Curi’s karma periodically spikes despite posting no significantly upvoted comments or any improvement in his reception. I suspect he or someone else who frequents his site may be generating puppet accounts to feed his comments karma (his older comments appear to have gone through periodic blanket spikes.) He’s posted main page and discussion articles multiple times after his karma has dropped to zero without first producing more comments that are upvoted, due to these spikes.
If this is true, it would be natural for the moderators to step in and ban him.
I asked matt if this could be confirmed, but apparently there’s only a very time-consuming method to gather anything other than circumstantial evidence for the accusation.
Jimrandomh had an idea for setting up a script that might help, maybe talk to him? In any event, it might be useful to have the capability to do this in general. That said, since this is only the first time we’ve had such a problem, it doesn’t seem as of right now that this is a common enough issue to really justify investing in additional capabilities for the software.
I believe that “popperclipping” is a play on words, a joke, alluding to a popular LW topic. Explaining it more might kill the joke.
Currently, on the main page, the most recent post under “Recent Posts” is curi’s The Conjunction Fallacy Does Not Exist. The comments under this are showing up in the Recent Comments column. Of the five comments I see in the recent comments column, three are comments under curi’s posts. That is a majority. As of now, then, it appears that curi continues to dominate discussion, either directly or by triggering responses.
Damn, I thought it was in the discussion. Then, I retract my statement that karma works. Still, what’s the explanation? Where did curi get enough karma to balance the blow from his heavily downvoted comments and posts? I have looked onto two pages of his recent activity where his score was −112 (-70 for the main page post, −42 for the rest). And I know he was near zero after his last but one main page post was published.
Maybe mass upvoting by sockpuppets?
Certainly. I only missed the standard name for that behaviour spelled out loud.