My impression is that prolific posters show up on the Top Contributors list more often than low-post-count, high-karma posters. And, of course, worst of all they don’t get ranked by positive karma percentage, or by karma per post. Somebody posting a good article in Main seems to be a less common cause of showing up on the list than high output.
For that reason, I don’t see it as having a positive motivational effect either. I pay loads of attention to my positive karma percentage, none at all to karma in absolute terms. If I wanted to be on the list, my best bet would be to chime in on everything no matter how low-value my opinion actually is – which appears to be a poor and occasionally frustrating use of my time. Quality, not quantity.
I pay loads of attention to my positive karma percentage
I’ve seen a suggestion in a comment here that you don’t want your positive karma percentage to be near 100%, because it indicates you are being consumed by the hive mind.
you don’t want your positive karma percentage to be near 100%, because it indicates you are being consumed by the hive mind.
I think there are aspects of posting where one most certainly wants to be ‘consumed by the hivemind’—if your posts are never so poorly reasoned that you get a downvote for that reason, then more power to you!
And if one is polite, clear, and kind, one can weigh in on controversial topics with a different view than the hivemind and still not get downvoted.
That’s something you might want to go by. Not me. I don’t thrive in controversy nearly as much as you. The topics on which LessWrongers go hivemind-y about can very easily be sidestepped without incurring downvotes; medium to low karma percentages more often indicate that the poster has a penchant for getting himself into every controversial shit the site has to offer.
My impression is that prolific posters show up on the Top Contributors list more often than low-post-count, high-karma posters. And, of course, worst of all they don’t get ranked by positive karma percentage, or by karma per post. Somebody posting a good article in Main seems to be a less common cause of showing up on the list than high output.
For that reason, I don’t see it as having a positive motivational effect either. I pay loads of attention to my positive karma percentage, none at all to karma in absolute terms. If I wanted to be on the list, my best bet would be to chime in on everything no matter how low-value my opinion actually is – which appears to be a poor and occasionally frustrating use of my time. Quality, not quantity.
I’ve seen a suggestion in a comment here that you don’t want your positive karma percentage to be near 100%, because it indicates you are being consumed by the hive mind.
I think there are aspects of posting where one most certainly wants to be ‘consumed by the hivemind’—if your posts are never so poorly reasoned that you get a downvote for that reason, then more power to you!
And if one is polite, clear, and kind, one can weigh in on controversial topics with a different view than the hivemind and still not get downvoted.
If you succeed at everything you’re not taking enough risks :-P
That’s something you might want to go by. Not me. I don’t thrive in controversy nearly as much as you. The topics on which LessWrongers go hivemind-y about can very easily be sidestepped without incurring downvotes; medium to low karma percentages more often indicate that the poster has a penchant for getting himself into every controversial shit the site has to offer.
It wasn’t my comment and I don’t have a strong opinion on the matter. I suspect it was at least half tongue-in-cheek, anyway.