So (in other words) you want to require actual upvotes (from others) to earn karma, rather than merely avoiding downvotes. Are you sure this is a good idea?
But why shouldn’t it correlate with post count? That way the incentive structure encourages active participation; under the system Eliezer prefers, people might be tempted to hold back.
Is this there a need to correct things in this direction? Are we getting too many low-quality posts and comments?
(I also think that the automatic self-upvote makes sense on the grounds that making a comment should itself be considered a statement about what sort of comments the user would like to see more of. If not, the user can always undo the upvote.)
But why shouldn’t it correlate with post count? That way the incentive structure encourages active participation; under the system Eliezer prefers, people might be tempted to hold back.
Since comments tend to get upvoted more often than downvoted, why would people hold back? A comment’s ‘expected karma’ would still be positive :)
We can still add an extra “post count” to a user’s profile if anybody needs to know that.
And no, I don’t think that this site is glutted with low-quality comments, but it’s young and I already can’t keep track of all that’s being said, so a gentle nudge in the “quality over quantity” direction would be a Good Thing.
But why shouldn’t it correlate with post count? That way the incentive structure encourages active participation; under the system Eliezer prefers, people might be tempted to hold back.
That depends on whether or not total karma is supposed to indicate anything meaningful. As is, it will mostly indicate how early a member joined and how active they’ve been.
So (in other words) you want to require actual upvotes (from others) to earn karma, rather than merely avoiding downvotes. Are you sure this is a good idea?
Why shouldn’t one’s own vote count?
Because right now user karma correlates more strongly with post count than with post quality. You get what you measure, so that needs to be fixed.
But why shouldn’t it correlate with post count? That way the incentive structure encourages active participation; under the system Eliezer prefers, people might be tempted to hold back.
Is this there a need to correct things in this direction? Are we getting too many low-quality posts and comments?
(I also think that the automatic self-upvote makes sense on the grounds that making a comment should itself be considered a statement about what sort of comments the user would like to see more of. If not, the user can always undo the upvote.)
Since comments tend to get upvoted more often than downvoted, why would people hold back? A comment’s ‘expected karma’ would still be positive :)
We can still add an extra “post count” to a user’s profile if anybody needs to know that.
And no, I don’t think that this site is glutted with low-quality comments, but it’s young and I already can’t keep track of all that’s being said, so a gentle nudge in the “quality over quantity” direction would be a Good Thing.
That depends on whether or not total karma is supposed to indicate anything meaningful. As is, it will mostly indicate how early a member joined and how active they’ve been.