Linked by Adam S on Wed 20th Feb 2008 00:41 UTC
Today, after much feedback and evaluation, we implemented some changes to the way OSNews "moderation" works. Previously, we had a dual-purposed feedback system - an "up" vote was based on agreement, but a "down" vote was based on specific rules. We've changed the way things work around here, read more for the details. 
Thread beginning with comment 301670
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-09-25
I'm kinda just thinking out loud here, but could there be some sort of metric so that the more you mod down, the less your votes count?
What about « the more a comment is modded, the more a vote counts. »
That way, an isolated voter won't be able to have a great impact.
Member since:2006-01-14
"I'm kinda just thinking out loud here, but could there be some sort of metric so that the more you mod down, the less your votes count?
What about « the more a comment is modded, the more a vote counts. »
That way, an isolated voter won't be able to have a great impact. "
I think this leaves them open for groups of people who agree to help each other out by voting down the same people.
I think "too much influence" on a per vote basis is NOT the problem. The goal should be to eliminate people who make a hobby out of trolling and aggravating users. Dissenting votes, in and of themselves, are fine. However, if you are excessively voting people down, you're influence and thus your opinion becomes less valuable.
Member since:
2006-01-14
Adam,
I'm kinda just thinking out loud here, but could there be some sort of metric so that the more you mod down, the less your votes count? The only way to restore your voting metric could be elapsed time. Restoring it by modding up would be too easy for people to abuse.
Furthermore, you could possibly make negativity visible to others. That way, if you make excessive negative comments, it shows. And, again, you are stuck that way until after some time has passed.
I've never really thought about it before. But, there does seem to be some relationship between the power to vote people down and the increase in unwanted traffic.
I can appreciate what you are trying to accomplish here. I've often wished I had a way to mod people down because I disagreed with them. But, I've resisted because I try to respect the spirit of the rules. But, not having that ability may be one of the things that keeps the OSNews threads/comments as clean as they are and what keeps OSNews unique.
So, I would caution you to be very careful about giving too much control to people to mod down. And, if modding down is continued, attach some negative consequence to discourage it. Come to think of it, do we really need to mod every post we read, either up or down? If you really feel strongly about a post, just reply to it. Maybe too much modding (either positive or negative) should be viewed as bad. A real world example of where this happens is, getting a credit report. Simply checking your credit worthiness lowers your credit score.
Finally, remember that OSNews has done well over the years, and just because a majority of people agree, including me, it may not be what's best for them.
I read OSNews everyday. I appreciate what you guys do. Keep up the good work.