Ask YC: Do you care about Karma?
Since the last influx of users, I have been thinking about social aggregation systems such as news.YC.
And, to put it in a nutshell, I believe that for communities such as nYC which are, not mainstream, comparatively close knit and somewhat homogeneous, it is possible to improve the quality of the submissions and comments if we removed individual karma altogether but kept the voting system for submissions and comments intact.
What do you think?
62 comments
[ 4.3 ms ] story [ 112 ms ] threadFor the person: it is a simplest way to see if you fit or not in this community. For the community: quickly judge if the post or comment is spam or not.
To illustrate another subtle point. Lets, take your karma and compare it with mine and compare mine with someone like nickb. Now what conclusions can I draw about whether I fit into this community.
I can see that you joined a year ago but didn't gain much karma. That means that you're an old timer, but a lurker, who doesn't post or comment often.
nickb and other top 10 karma users define this community and they lead by example.
I joined just recently, because I somebody posted a story about my startup and I had to comment. But since that I've been posting stuff that people care about.
All this is visible by looking at the profile of the user, without knowing exact posting history. This is huge time saver for everybody involved.
Finally, as a supposed 'lurker', it might serve me better not to login and just read submissions instead of participating by voting. Clearly, voting and commenting are also measures of 'being in a community'. So as lurkers stop logging in they cannot vote and then voting drops making the submission rankings either volatile or static.
I do not understand your line of reasoning.
Do you know a better system?
Yes, I am suggesting an alternate mechanism which uses only voting on submissions and comments while discarding individual karma.
In fact, if it were the case that only the high karma belong, there'd be nothing to contribute to and no high karma. People like kashif and the thousands of other lurkers are why this community exists in the first place, much more so than nickb or any of the other leaders.
Speaking for myself, I have a high karma because I'm a slacker. I consider it an inverse metric of my worth.
So my question:
What is the value of high quality content ordering? Are the present ordering strategies on HN/reddit/[insert karma-based discovery site] good enough? Would the theoretically perfect ordering offer much more value than current systems?
That's a very clever detail.
I don't downvote often, and I don't have anything against you, but it is important that everyone, especially the lurkers, feel welcome here. My downvote is to show you don't speak for all of the community, since this response and my karma means your comment is self refuting.
Content based filtering is extremely expensive, just look at email. Reputation based filtering is quick and easy both for people and computers, but it has its own drawbacks, I agree.
This includes not only obsession with gaining karma, but obsession with how to better measure, display or distribute/earn karma points.
What I would personally prefer to see is someone present a valid, (semi)tested proposal for a better system. There have been a lot of threads withe what I personally consider to be vague half-suggestions for "improvement" that don't really articulate how the proposal will make news:YC cumulatively "better".
When I'm reading the site or submitting comments or linking I don't really find myself giving a lot of merit to the overall rankings. I'm just as likely to add a comment to a story with a ranking of 100 as I am to a story ranked 1, provided the story itself interests me.
Perhaps your argument would be more persuasive if you applied it to some submissions or comments showing how it would affect those items for the overall betterment of the site.
Interesting.
But I care more for a good conversation.
- EDIT -
I want to add that my most recent submission that did get me a lot of karma was not posted for the sake of karma. I genuinely am curious and I appreciate all the responses.
However, that being said, I am more a "consumer" of this site than a "poster." I am not trying to be heard, trusted, or accepted by anyone here.
It's sad too, though.
If pg says anything he gets at least 50 points for being pg. The rest is because pg is actually smart and doesn't usually say dumb unthoughtful things.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=166110
More people read pg's comments, so he does get more upvotes than the same words would if coming from someone else. However, to say that you can mention pg in a comment to get more votes is neither true nor particularly funny.
Also very telling: score velocity over time. For example, if `joe` makes a good point with factual grounding and is getting lots of points. Then `bob` replies in disagreement and bob provides almost nothing to back up his position. Then suddenly the points reverse (joe goes negative and bob gets lots of points) just because bob said it it must be true and everyone blindly agreed. There are ways to measure this impulse response that would provide more concrete numerical measurements.
Median score... there are so many effects that would cause this to not relate to comment quality that that is pretty useless. For example, just commenting on more active topics can give you a much better median score.
Mostly.
One day I noticed that I had about 180 karma and decided to try for 250 so I could change the colour of the Navbar. After clearing 250 (and changing the color to a nice soothing green vs the default orange), I find I don't really care about Karma.
A soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of colored ribbon. - Napoleon
Post-wise, I have some gripes with the way karma works, in that your high-value comment can easily go ignored because it starts off at the bottom of a well-populated thread. Which, for karma-gamers, means it makes more sense to reply to a comment with high karma to increase the visibility of your comment rather than starting a new comment thread. And it also means that your average karma per post doesn't necessarily reflect your average value per post.
I didn't know hacker news added silly features based on karma. How pathetic.
Slashdot had the right idea when you were limited to one post a day (or whatever) when your karma got to -10. If you can't write content that other people enjoy, you need to leave or adjust your attitude. Karma is a way of making people feel bad enough to go away :)
The more people we can encourage to stay on /b/, the better... 'cause I really don't care to read that drivel, but I do care to read what people think about programming-related things.
Having karma today allows PG to make changes tomorrow if he needed to take care of quality issues.
plus their karma system seems less easy to use.