AskSaidIt

AskSaidIt

log in
sign up
subreddits
search
sidebar

Saidit, what if we showed who voted on everything?(self)

37 points36 points39 points submitted by magnora7

We had an idea and wanted to float it out to the community to see what you all think about it.

Basically on any post, imagine you'd see a list of everyone who voted on the post, and if they voted insightful and/or funny.

This way we would have more transparency, and if someone was trying to use a bunch of different usernames to upvote their own content, but never voted on anything else, it'd become super obvious to everyone.

We would probably only have this vote record on posts, not on comments. What do you all think of this potential feature?

top 100 commentsshow all 130

Vigte 12 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 2 fun 5 years ago

I'm down to try it out for a bit - but I think the ability for third parties to simply harvest the data/usernames might be too much of a risk.

We all know why we are here, after all.

FormosaOolong 5 insightful - 6 fun5 insightful - 5 fun6 insightful - 6 fun 5 years ago

I upvoted Vigte

Vigte 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun 5 years ago

Vigte insightfuled FormosaOolong Vigte funnied FormosaOolong.

magnora7[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

I'm down to try it out for a bit - but I think the ability for third parties to simply harvest the data/usernames might be too much of a risk.

I see your concern, but it's an anonymous username, and on top of that every comment and post you've made is on your userpage. So showing votes publicly isn't that much additional info. Plus it wouldn't be shown on the userpage, only on each post's page.

Froglich 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun 5 years ago

Froglich is my real name.

JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

No it isn't : /s/InfoGalactic/comments/8xr/infogalactic_is_an_uncensored_deeplinked_wiki/inf

Vigte 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

I'd have to sign up for another user name for the trial period - but I'm down to try it out ;)

JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

Like Froglich / Vigte7 did.

I'm tempted to, if only just to start new subs. But I'm not like that. I'm a rule breaker by nature, but I respect SaidIt so I only have one user name.

Vigte 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

Still want to know who Vigte7 is :p

Tom_Bombadil 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun 5 years ago

Sounds great. I've been wondering who the hell is voting for that MartinTimothyesque bullshit.

However, Froglich hates that idea.

Edit: I have changed my mind. Does anyone know what the Reddit rationale was being leaving vote counts anonymous. I'd be concerned about a future big brother crackdown where voting info could be used as evidence against someone.

Here's some historical situations that may be similar in nature to a future event.

  • Red scare McCarthy-era. People were targeted as anarchist, or socialist, or people who might vote for "socialist proposals"
  • The 9/11 Muslim hysteria where thousands of Muslims were rounded up and jailed for as many as 6 months without probable cause, or any evidence
  • There was a hunt for anonymous a while back, so dissident programmer types may draw additional scrutiny.

The last 2 were within the past two decades in the US, so that's not ancient history. Who knows what other events occurred in other countries.

Up-votes may actually be more risky than actual comments. My guess is that up-votes would be manipulated as metadata. Prosecutors can create broad assumptions about intent, and there's no way to easily clarify that intent, or refute it. They'll use one-sided gotcha questions like, "have you quit beating your wife yet, yes or no?". That can catch people off guard and sunk their defense.

I'm going to have to agree with OldManCorley on this one. There are unforseen risks that could easily outweigh the short-term benefits.

Intentional sabotage cannot be ignored forever. Certain agent provacatuers do need to be addressed. Other groups have already taken the lead on this, and dealt accordingly.

One idea I had was to create one of those bots that chime in with "and my axe", etc. A custom version could be created to haunt the posts of certain repeat offenders.

Something like:

"Free speech is not a core value, when it is apples solely to statements that an individual approves. Free speech is a value when it is defended for those who use their voice to make statements that that one despises. Saidit supports free speech in all forms.

Unfortunately, certain groups or individuals have been posting comments that we cannot find any factual evidence to support. Attempts have been made to contact these individuals, but without success.

These voices have not been silenced in the interest of our commitment to free speech as a value. Saidit does not condone or endorse messages or the message history of {agent provacatuer XYZIJK}.

Please use your own critical judgment when considering messages from XYZIJK; AND MY AXE!!!.

-There I SaidIt!

Just a thought. What does the group think?

One last point of consideration. Dissent voices should be carful considered.
Good call OldManCorley. You changed my mind.

Hey Froglich. You suck.

Edit 2:. I didn't read the updated comment before the previous edit. I agree with major that ignoring bullshit is the best way to deal with most commenting issues. Organizational sabotage is an entirely different issue.

Also, if implemented, can we call the 'my axe' response "the moat/sewer of debate" or "sewer of the pyramid" or "sewer of disgrace". Free speech Bot, or "free speech defender", or sumpting.

useless_aether 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun 5 years ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/MartinTimothyAlts/comments/343r4m/revised_alts_list/

edit: magnora found it.

also, here is a sub on voat with the same everything: https://voat.co/v/martintimothy

i_cansmellthat 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun 5 years ago

Woah...that's a long list.

Tom_Bombadil 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

Looks like a shill sleeper cell.

JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun 5 years ago

Don't forget "/u/Froglich" is a spoof curmudgeon alias account of someone already on SaidIt under another alias. It could be you.

Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

You may have been deceived...

Froglich is cunning...

JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun 5 years ago

Naw.

I saw Froglich eating his own poop and liking it. I won't even tell you what he did to his little sister...

Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun 5 years ago

"Council of the People"

useless_aether 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

sounds like an interesting social experiment. would people vote more or less often? would it increase or decrease the number of comments? would it spread beyond saidit? any game theorists around here?

edit: hm, maybe it is less painful to implement a block subverse and block user function, so each individual user can customize exposure to disinfo..

edit 2: we could even maintain a list of known spammers and shills / subs and automatically restrict expoure for brand new users, while informing them this is being done (and why) and ofc provide a way for everybody to disable any filters as they see fit... this just to avoid any initial shock newcomers might have seeing all the spam/hate posts

[deleted] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

Yeah we should have block user functionality regardless of everything else. Kinda bummed that reddit open source doesn't have it, we'll have to add it.

Edit: we do have block user functionality. The block link only shows in "messages". It appears to work just like old Reddit. https://saidit.net/message/inbox/

Shall we put the block user link everywhere?

useless_aether 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

yes pls!

the blackmetal guy is also in my crosshairs

edit: just to ckarify, i have nothing against the black metal guy, i just dont like black metal. i would still like to see his posts in other subs! thats why i think a block-sub is also useful.

edit2: i had to block ~100 subs on voat to make it palatable, but only had to block one or two users. .

so, in the end, i see a block-sub much more useful and needed than a block user

OldManCorley 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

I agree, the block sub feature is one of the Internet filtering system that actually works and I see no ethical concerns with.

useless_aether 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

what i like is that its upto each user to use it as needed and nobody will point fingers at the admins for implementing censorship. its all delegated to individuals and needs zero admin maintenance.

JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

Block sub is unnecessary.

If you are subscribed to all subs, then you can just unsubscribe from BlackMetal and use "All" instead of "Home" and still catch everything but what you unsubscribe from.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

useless_aether 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

no, i just checked. i am not subscribed to blackmetal and it shows up in all. i guess all really means all.

JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

It would not change my votes at all. I love you folks and all but I don't give a fuuuuuuck what you think about my votes.

There are pros to anonymity - who's voice shouldn't matter.

But when there are malicious forces then accountability is critical.

That's a conundrum.

I'm for transparency.

If rigged Steemit can have transparent voting why can't we?

useless_aether 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

i dont mind having public voting, but at the same time i hate wading through crap day after day. i value my time more than that. we could have both things going, no problem (d3rr might disagree :-)

JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

How does wading through crap relate to transparent voting?

useless_aether 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

well, i think this whole idea (transparent voting) is being introduced because of the martintimothy sub and its alt users spamming s/all a little bit too much with antisemitism. so we should be able to see how the same alts are upvoating the same hate posts...

but on voat they have a 'block subverse' function under each post and its incredibly handy to clean up their v/all page. the amount of porn (and worse than that) is insane. the site would be absolutely unusable without it.

OldManCorley 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun 5 years ago

Then I'll stop voting unless I 100% endorse everything in the post and possibly comments.

"I see your argument, but you upvoted X two and a half weeks so your opinion is invalid. Also you're a Nazi sine you upvoted the CRISPR post a month ago, WHY DO YOU WANT TO KILL BABIES".

Remember when I badgered you admins for a default response to unwanted content and you magnora ignored me and d3rr basically blew off the whole premise? A few weeks later and now the new section is mutating into Voat.

Enforce this public voting and a few weeks saidit will be monkey house shitslinger central.

Froglich 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun 5 years ago

I remembered that homeboy! Also, I'm a hippity hop shitslinging punzunkler.

Having said that; what is the impetus behind this proposed change to the voting structure. What are the anticipated benefits of listing the pseudo-identity of every up-voter? When could this change be misused, or silence members of the community? Are there any examples of this being successful implemented? Could we see a scenario similar to this?

JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun 5 years ago

An opinion coming from the alias of an alias.

magnora7[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

Remember when I badgered you admins for a default response to unwanted content and you magnora ignored me and d3rr basically blew off the whole premise?

That's because the proper response is to ignore it. That's how we designed the system.

Why do you care what someone thinks about how you vote with a username that's anonymous? If they want to skewer you, they'll just go through your comments like they do on reddit.

Having the usernames out lets us easily see networks of usernames who only upvote each other and don't participate in the larger community, aka users that are likely astroturfing

FormosaOolong 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

I worry about this being/becoming more datamining to be used later when MI6 take over your username. I'd much rather have block-user, because honestly these shillspam weirdos are pretty easy to spot even without the voter ID.

ETA: Block sub is also an excellent idea IMO, thanks to those who proposed it.

Tom_Bombadil 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

Agreed, in hindsight.

OldManCorley 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

That's because the proper response is to ignore it.

That's a unfriendly way to look at user feedback. I'm talking about you ignoring my request for a standard on how to treat unwanted material.

Unless you're saying my feedbacks are unwanted material or course.

Why do you care what someone thinks about how you vote with a username that's anonymous?

I found out who an mod on reddit was by following his username. He thought he'd separated his online account and everything but forgot he'd used his username at a forum elsewhere.

From that forum I was able to piece together who his real life friend was, and from his Facebook it wasn't hard to find the name of said mod. Within minutes I knew where he worked, where he lived, what the name of his spouse and kid were and when Facebook started suggesting the kids kindergarten I felt the excersize had run its course.

By showing to everyone who's voting for who you open up the system for profiling and networking connections. There are some benefits to the users, but I argue the risk far outweighs the reward.

I care because I know there are many groups that want to silence or harm me and others because of who we support and our worldview. Or maybe more correct would be that there's always someone who wants to silence anyone...

If they want to skewer you, they'll just go through your comments like they do on reddit.

Yes. That's one way of breaking down a discussing to the bottom level of the debate pyramid. I don't think it's wise with one more.

By removing the ability to see what we support, they have to debate our statements instead of reacting to what topics we want to cheer on by upvoting, and their personal beliefs on why we upvoted.

Having the usernames out lets us easily see networks of usernames who only upvote each other and don't participate in the larger community, aka users that are likely astroturfing

Unless you give us users a way to deal with this, I don't see what good it does. No downvote? We have to compete with uovotes. Not enough post I actually want to upvote but there's actual racist and discriminatory post on the frontpage?

Upvote the most popular ones.

This is a straight lane to a solidified saidit culture based on a common hate for spam rather than a shared love of the posted topic.

JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun 5 years ago

Are you a man OldMan or a coward Corley?

Stand up for your convictions.

Your comments say volumes more than your votes do.

Sure, they are watching and we don't have to make it easy for them - as they already have it all, alegedly.

But we don't have to make it easy for "them" either.

Be bold, be brave, suck it up and vote in the open - under your alias.

magnora7[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

We want to avoid the upvote/downvote wars that destroyed reddit. That's why ignoring bad content is our preferred route of action.

I care because I know there are many groups that want to silence or harm me and others because of who we support and our worldview.

Then why on Earth would you want a downvote?

On the second point, if users can recognize shill networks, they'd be less likely to vote positively on them.

YoungBriteEyedCorley 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

I'll keep voting. My margin for approval is 55%.

Mnemonic 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun 5 years ago

I'm not sure... Might start discussions about someones vote too much and thereby generating comments that are 99% sure to be useless.

This would also give more power to votes given and less to ignored ones. I mean, did I ignore a posting or was I away for a day a 'missed' it?

Edit: I can see this starting people to use the fun vote to denigrate a posting (So you can show you 'disagree').

[deleted] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

i agree, this could be exploited by users to start witchhunts and drive users off the platform and keep potential new users away when they see the shit flyin.

JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

Not as long as the witchhunts are publicly held in an open forum. Too many of us are skeptics, including skeptics of the process and skeptics of witchhunts. If it's all transparent then reason should prevail and only fail if ignored.

There are boogie men and witches and G-men and Mossad out there up to no good and we need to be ready.

JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

For this reason I give little credence to the average votes at all. There are standouts but there are countless that should be but are overlooked.

Let's say you post A+++ quality content at 3am UTC.

A few folks post a bunch of stuff between 3am and 7am and some folks only browse the first page under "new" and vote on things that get re-voted on from 7am to 10am while more content floods in.

Your A+++ post is lost in time like tears in rain.

Comment votes are a whole other ball of wax. I can comment, someone can reply, I can see it, then there can be a whole flurry of activity to their reply - and I won't even be notified about it.

Also, I can comment on a post I'm interested in, and others can comment there too, and I won't be notified about it.

The lack of awareness on SaidIt is problematic.

Mnemonic 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

Well, tbqh JasonCarswell and I don't mean this bad (unless you like it so :p) I (and I'm aware that I might be wrong) see saidit as a news agregator with options to comment. So It wouldn't matter too much if I'm absent for awhile and start commenting/voting again when I have time. It's a better 'view of the day' mostly, unless a submitt truely sticks, I save it and check it whenever I feel like it for updated comments not replying to me... but even those get lost in the rain with the tears of RL, time and sadly 'the baddies win always'. (JK, and no {NOT JfK}) I just check new and if that goes on too long before I see I voted for something I just quit and go over some subs I'm thinking of right then and there.

I'm getting the feelings/vibes you see saidit more as a weirdly ordered wiki-type structure where your problems described above would be more meaningful/biug problems.

TL;DR:

saidit is just MSM only curated by yours trulies {A pun on truly and the multiple)...

Ehm, not facebook comments by your drunk aunt, but self-acquired wisdom from your woke Internet-librarian

It's the same as a news agregaor, facebook 'news sites' only way, way better. But the concept is the same sort off...

JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

"RL" ?

The baddies don't always win. It seems like it's getting more intense but they haven't won, nor have we. It's an ongoing struggle, though most folks aren't engaged. Maybe they're wu wei.

I suspect SaidIt and wikis have more in common than we know.

As I stated in the opening paragraph of https://infogalactic.com/info/SaidIt#Criticisms : " SaidIt has inherited many of the systemic flaws that Reddit, Steemit, and countless other forums suffer from in regards to timely voting and exposure. Additional sub, post, and comment threads may certainly benefit from more than default responses-only notifications and/or more than just two emoticon-voting options, but these can't fix all of these issues. "

"meaningful/biug problems" ?

At least getting notification options on posts and comments you want to auto-follow would improve the awareness on this social medium.

*Awareness in this case is about notifications on conversations, not about being "woke".

I'm going to quote you for the article.

FYI "lost in time like tears in rain" is a poetic over dramatic quote from Bladerunner I love.

Mnemonic 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

FYI "lost in time like tears in rain" is a poetic over dramatic quote from Bladerunner I love.

FYI I know, I've met the actor that said those words many times. RL is RealLife.

The baddies don't always win.

When was an instance the baddies didn't win? Or better yet, when did the goodies ever win (so you can't cheap out with a draw).

It seems like it's getting more intense but they haven't won, nor have we. It's an ongoing struggle, though most folks aren't engaged. Maybe they're wu wei.

Wu wei is A Chinese concept and if something they aren't not engaged, I wouldn't take the literal translation too literal, it's more a (as western translations would call it) esoteric expression. [the pun, double negatives and all are with meaning]

It doesn't mean what you wanted it to mean in that phrase and opens fortune cookie '"Many turtles laugh" how many? You ask. "It's turtles all the way" rings the answer.'

I suspect SaidIt and wikis have more in common than we know.

Not in the way I meant.

Awareness in this case is about notifications on conversations, not about being "woke".

But that's not really what this thread is about, it's not about notifications. Also as I sated above in my view those notifications would also get lost in the rain with the tears of Real Life when the days go by and the articles aren't that relevant anymore because this is more a news aggregator than a wiki-system.

I think you misinterpreted my vision of a librarian: someone that orders and provides information but doesn't bother you and doesn't like too much noise.

I'm going to quote you for the article.

Is that a threat? At least do it better than before 'Mneumonic' is not my handle... https://infogalactic.com/info/SaidIt#cite_note-DebatePyramid5-8

Alduin 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

Sounds like something to try. Who knows if it will work as intended or have some kind of cobra effect? Just don't get too attached to ideas that don't work.

To me it sounds like a great idea.

wendolynne 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

it would be like facebook 'likes'. you could see who agrees with you. cliches would form.

Tom_Bombadil 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

Magnora7 and d3rr.

Old Man Corley had me rethinking my previous position.

wizzwizz4 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

I think you should instead have a "voting diversity" score, calculated with data from the last month, a "voting divergency" score, calculated by comparing behaviour from the past two months, and a "voting novelty" score for datums that don't fit in the "voting divergency" algorithm.

The delay should serve to restrict gaming of the system to people who can be bothered to look through the code.

[deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

How would this voting diversity score work?

Mnemonic 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

I can only see it ratting out vote-spams or scheduled-vote-session, because some submits just get more traffic than usual and we pretty much remove spammers already because you don't need an algorithm for that to spot (Like that Australian lawyers firm :p ).

wizzwizz4 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

But it's not too good at ratting out MartinTimothy.

JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

Were MartinTimothy's votes skewing anything significantly?

wizzwizz4 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

How many different people you vote for, divided by total number of votes, compared against the site's average (so 1 is the average). Most people would be slightly above 1, and the spammers would be lower down.

Although maybe the stat would only be visible to admins; anyone could compute it themselves if they wanted to. I'm not really sure how to stop people from gaming it whilst maintaining transparency.

OldManCorley 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

How many different people you vote for, divided by total number of votes, compared against the site's average

Similar stuff have been tried, the way to circumvent it is to set an array of "related" subs (or manually select random posts) and have two out of three votes be driveby votes on random posts to fuzzy the "upvote diversity".

Its a tough challenge I still haven't seen a good solution to.

wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

We could add a daily post vote limit.

[deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

Ahh not bad. It does seem that everything can be gamed on anonymous platforms if someone really wants to put the effort into it.

wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

But the gaming allows manipulation. We don't want the site taken over by authoritarian manipulators.

JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

Overkill.

wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

Please, tell your solution.

JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

100% transparency.

wizzwizz4 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

Which would turn Saidit into yet another data mine.

Do you have any thought-through ideas?

fred_red_beans 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

I don't see it as useful for all users as they really can't act on the information other than to pass along the information, but maybe useful for mods and admins.

magnora7[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

That's a fair point, but the users also vote. So if the users can easily recognize shill groups, they might be more likely to avoid upvoting them

fred_red_beans 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

Yes, I think there is value in having more eyes on a problem as it were.

Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun 5 years ago

Agreed!

JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun 5 years ago

I want as much transparency as possible.