Unlikely to happen, I think that'd dissuade people from participating. It's just generally too fundamental of a change... although I like the idea on the surface.
What we could do is give some non-identifying stats such as average account age, average karma, etc - then it'd at least be possible to spot posts that were upvoted or downvoted by a bunch of inactive bot accounts?
I've always liked the idea of needing to "spend" your useless internet points to vote. New accounts would have to actually participate in the site to be able to vote (or gain something like a few points a day), and users who participate a lot would rarely, if ever, run out of points.
This would be a VERY fundamental change, however, and I'm sure there would be too many drawbacks to such a system.
EDIT: feel free to continue down-voting a mere opinion when I already said it wouldn't work.
Like I said, there would be many drawbacks. You couldn't just switch to such a system, a whole new one would have to be built from the ground up around it. An alternative method would have every account with a 'budget' that increases the more you upvote and decreases the more you downvote. That would make bot accounts that downvote everything on the site a lot harder to implement, but a modicum of participation would leave you free to downvote, as long as you were contributing positive input at a higher rate.
I'm just spit-balling about social media sites in general, not actually making suggestions for this site.
Exactly. I think there is something there, it just needs something more to make it work right. A 'reddit-like' site would have to be built around such a system from the ground up, too. It couldn't just be switched on a whim.
Disclosure: I'll downvote a good, but merely entertaining, comment to push a greater, factually relevant, comment to the top. I might be less inclined to do this if the votes weren't anonymous.
Unlikely to happen, I think that'd dissuade people from participating. It's just generally too fundamental of a change... although I like the idea on the surface.
What we could do is give some non-identifying stats such as average account age, average karma, etc - then it'd at least be possible to spot posts that were upvoted or downvoted by a bunch of inactive bot accounts?
On slashdot, one only receives a limited number of voting points to give. I think that's a bit draconian.
But we could have a stat to see how many up or down votes we've issued.
A real spoil sport would have more down votes than up.
I've always liked the idea of needing to "spend" your useless internet points to vote. New accounts would have to actually participate in the site to be able to vote (or gain something like a few points a day), and users who participate a lot would rarely, if ever, run out of points.
This would be a VERY fundamental change, however, and I'm sure there would be too many drawbacks to such a system.
EDIT: feel free to continue down-voting a mere opinion when I already said it wouldn't work.
Like I said, there would be many drawbacks. You couldn't just switch to such a system, a whole new one would have to be built from the ground up around it. An alternative method would have every account with a 'budget' that increases the more you upvote and decreases the more you downvote. That would make bot accounts that downvote everything on the site a lot harder to implement, but a modicum of participation would leave you free to downvote, as long as you were contributing positive input at a higher rate.
I'm just spit-balling about social media sites in general, not actually making suggestions for this site.
Ooooo like a gold-backed currency vs fiat!
Exactly. I think there is something there, it just needs something more to make it work right. A 'reddit-like' site would have to be built around such a system from the ground up, too. It couldn't just be switched on a whim.
Disclosure: I'll downvote a good, but merely entertaining, comment to push a greater, factually relevant, comment to the top. I might be less inclined to do this if the votes weren't anonymous.
Good karma = green bar. Bad karma = red bar. Similar to GLP.
sounds like a social credit score. I dont like it.
Only if it was based on something like the past 30 days worth of points to gauge participation like Antifederalist mentioned