The question was specifically about the ones that get lots of downvotes. That is, the ones where he’s riding his hobbyhorse of complaining about the phenomenon of men not getting any sex even though they’d like to, and specifically the fact that he is in that situation. Do you find those relevant and interesting?
(Most recent examples, in reverse-historical order: one, two, three though that one only kinda fits the pattern, four, five.)
(Most recent examples, in reverse-historical order: one, two, three though that one only kinda fits the pattern, four, five.)
From the net karma and the ratio of karma one can compute the number of votes, approximately. (Approximately, because the ratio is only reported to the nearest 1%.) As of this moment, these five posts have received at least the following number of votes, listed as up, down, and total:
21 25 46
20 22 42
10 11 21
6 6 12
11 14 25
These are minimum numbers, e.g. the first (-2 total, 48% positive) is also consistent with 32 34 66.
20 is an extraordinary number of downvotes to receive, but as far as I know, there’s no karma minimum required for upvotes, One might think about changing that. I have to wonder how many accounts there are whose sole activity has been to upvote him.
Could we ask an admin to make a graph of all users on LW, with edges saying how many posts of one user another has upvoted, and all name labels removed except advancedatheist’s?
The numbers would have to be shuffled enough that no group of people could use public karma counts and their knowledge of whom they upvoted to gain too much info that ought to be anonymous.
Do we have a crypthography expert that can think of an algorithm that would work for that?
Or the admins could leave out the shuffling/delabeling and only examine the graph to see whether the situation is reasonable.
We could surely ask. Experience suggests that asking for such things is futile, I think mostly because the LW database is difficult to work with and the Tricyclists have little time (or enthusiasm, or something) for doing things to LW that require admin access.
Basically work that’s not done by asking an admin to do it but by somebody writing the necessary code (the system is open source) and then giving that code to be run against the database.
I seem to remember that there is a way to access the latest (simplified) database dump without admin access. Don’t remember where or whether it shows vote sources though.
If there are any such accounts, I would regard that as strong evidence of some kind of malfeasance. Note that advancedatheist vigorously denies any sort of abuse of the system and says he doesn’t know how those comments got so many upvotes.
The question was specifically about the ones that get lots of downvotes. That is, the ones where he’s riding his hobbyhorse of complaining about the phenomenon of men not getting any sex even though they’d like to, and specifically the fact that he is in that situation. Do you find those relevant and interesting?
(Most recent examples, in reverse-historical order: one, two, three though that one only kinda fits the pattern, four, five.)
From the net karma and the ratio of karma one can compute the number of votes, approximately. (Approximately, because the ratio is only reported to the nearest 1%.) As of this moment, these five posts have received at least the following number of votes, listed as up, down, and total:
These are minimum numbers, e.g. the first (-2 total, 48% positive) is also consistent with 32 34 66.
20 is an extraordinary number of downvotes to receive, but as far as I know, there’s no karma minimum required for upvotes, One might think about changing that. I have to wonder how many accounts there are whose sole activity has been to upvote him.
Could we ask an admin to make a graph of all users on LW, with edges saying how many posts of one user another has upvoted, and all name labels removed except advancedatheist’s?
The numbers would have to be shuffled enough that no group of people could use public karma counts and their knowledge of whom they upvoted to gain too much info that ought to be anonymous.
Do we have a crypthography expert that can think of an algorithm that would work for that?
Or the admins could leave out the shuffling/delabeling and only examine the graph to see whether the situation is reasonable.
We could surely ask. Experience suggests that asking for such things is futile, I think mostly because the LW database is difficult to work with and the Tricyclists have little time (or enthusiasm, or something) for doing things to LW that require admin access.
That seems way too much work for a little bit of internet drama.
Basically work that’s not done by asking an admin to do it but by somebody writing the necessary code (the system is open source) and then giving that code to be run against the database.
I seem to remember that there is a way to access the latest (simplified) database dump without admin access. Don’t remember where or whether it shows vote sources though.
If there are any such accounts, I would regard that as strong evidence of some kind of malfeasance. Note that advancedatheist vigorously denies any sort of abuse of the system and says he doesn’t know how those comments got so many upvotes.