Lesswrong reactions system creates the same bias as normal reactions—it’s much much easier to use the reaction someone already used. So the first person to use a reaction under a comment gets undue influence on what reactions there will be under that comment in the future.
I might say it fails to avoid that bias, rather than creating it. Personally, I think it carries enough more information than votes that it’s worth having it. In fact, I’d probably remove the agree/disagree and just fold it into reacts.
You could probably reduce the bias a little by putting “suggested reacts” in the same line, with a 0 next to them, so they can just be clicked rather than needing to discover and click. At the expense of clutter and not seeing the ACTUAL reacts as easily.
What if just turn off the possibility to use the reaction by clicking it in the list of already used reactions? Yes, people would use them less, but more deliberately.
Lesswrong reactions system creates the same bias as normal reactions—it’s much much easier to use the reaction someone already used. So the first person to use a reaction under a comment gets undue influence on what reactions there will be under that comment in the future.
I might say it fails to avoid that bias, rather than creating it. Personally, I think it carries enough more information than votes that it’s worth having it. In fact, I’d probably remove the agree/disagree and just fold it into reacts.
You could probably reduce the bias a little by putting “suggested reacts” in the same line, with a 0 next to them, so they can just be clicked rather than needing to discover and click. At the expense of clutter and not seeing the ACTUAL reacts as easily.
What if just turn off the possibility to use the reaction by clicking it in the list of already used reactions? Yes, people would use them less, but more deliberately.