People should not be discouraged from actively reading older posts and voting on them. Quite the opposite.
My feeling is that people should be able to reply to older posts. And I think upvoting helps bring attention to good comments and posts. I’m inclined to think that there’s enough downvoting in some modest number of months to give an adequate signal.
Voiceofra did over 800 downvotes to just three posters. I’m sick of dealing with this stuff. I want it to not happen. 5 downvotes per week on old posts doesn’t seem like a really onerous restrictions, but I don’t downvote a tremendous amount, so I might be typical-minding things.
5 downvotes per week is well below trouble, I think. 15 starts looking like karma-vampirism to me if someone is doing a vendetta.
Some people get dispirited if their karma is dropping, especially if there’s no apparent reason for it.
I agree that 800 is too much, and appropriate for banning.
Since you can “unvote” any particular karma vote you’ve made, wouldn’t it be easy enough to implement limits on downvotes of a particular person in day, week, month, year?
You reach your max, and the next time you try, you are prevented, and you get a message saying “It is a bannable offense to karma bomb other users”. That could be a rollover and a triggered message sent to your account.
(Note that the limits could be parameterized in increasingly complicated ways (scaled to karma of “victim”, perhaps). The point is not “the perfect set of limits”, but to find something better than the current limits. The problem can be ameliorated, not annihilated in all hypothetical cases. Life is full of tradeoffs. )
Problem limited and offenders who try to game the system are warned (I think the second is important too).
That should take care of all but the most committed douchebags without any required intervention from you.
As one of the Powers That Be Who Does Something Useful Around Here, I’d hope that your needs in your chosen useful duties would have pull with the feature development queue.
(EDIT: Maybe easier to run a nightly scan notifying people when they have gone over their limits. )
My feeling is that people should be able to reply to older posts. And I think upvoting helps bring attention to good comments and posts. I’m inclined to think that there’s enough downvoting in some modest number of months to give an adequate signal.
Voiceofra did over 800 downvotes to just three posters. I’m sick of dealing with this stuff. I want it to not happen. 5 downvotes per week on old posts doesn’t seem like a really onerous restrictions, but I don’t downvote a tremendous amount, so I might be typical-minding things.
5 downvotes per week is well below trouble, I think. 15 starts looking like karma-vampirism to me if someone is doing a vendetta.
Some people get dispirited if their karma is dropping, especially if there’s no apparent reason for it.
I think this is a reasonable rule.
I agree that 800 is too much, and appropriate for banning.
Since you can “unvote” any particular karma vote you’ve made, wouldn’t it be easy enough to implement limits on downvotes of a particular person in day, week, month, year?
You reach your max, and the next time you try, you are prevented, and you get a message saying “It is a bannable offense to karma bomb other users”. That could be a rollover and a triggered message sent to your account.
(Note that the limits could be parameterized in increasingly complicated ways (scaled to karma of “victim”, perhaps). The point is not “the perfect set of limits”, but to find something better than the current limits. The problem can be ameliorated, not annihilated in all hypothetical cases. Life is full of tradeoffs. )
Problem limited and offenders who try to game the system are warned (I think the second is important too).
That should take care of all but the most committed douchebags without any required intervention from you.
As one of the Powers That Be Who Does Something Useful Around Here, I’d hope that your needs in your chosen useful duties would have pull with the feature development queue.
(EDIT: Maybe easier to run a nightly scan notifying people when they have gone over their limits. )