PSA: Our site culture is dropping.

submitted by wizzwizz4 from self.SaidIt

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Tom_Bombadil 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

The SaidIt voting structure is a rigorously tested format.
The current format is elegant in it's simplicity.

If it's not broken, then don't fix it.

Certain parties are seemingly obsessed with other people's voting habits, which is one more unsurprising coincidence to add to the list.

Changing the voting structure led to the on-going demise of Reddit. The SaidIt voting structure is sound, which is probably why there is pressure to change it.

People are here because the system works. Contraversial posts get attention because the system is working as intended.

The addition of a potentially confusing voting system will not produce an atmosphere for community growth.
I doubt that an individual exists on the planet who would recommend a forum to a friend, based on it's wide range of custom voting options, so they could customize their level of voting interest for each submission.
That's the worst kind of nonsense fluffery.
Can you imagine being asked why you voted a 6, instead of an 8? Who cares about that shit, unless your interested in tracking certain individuals interests, or opinions. This creates an entire new set of risks, that I've described in the past.
We don't want our votes tracked.

Organic free-speech platforms should be allowed to develop freely, and without unnecessary complications.

[–]sawboss 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

"The SaidIt voting structure is sound, which is probably why there is pressure to change it."

Now everyone read that again, ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO THINK I HAVE OVERREACTED!

"which is probably why there is pressure to change it"

Which is why I resist such change.

Organic free-speech platforms should be allowed to develop freely, and without unnecessary complications.

Agreed.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

That's flawed logic.

The sky is blue, which is probably why the grass is green.

There's no causality.

I want better voting options. And I want better voting statistics. Not because the structure is sound or because I want to break it or because I want to rig the system.

If a moderately semi-funny meme got a lot of votes and a profoundly excellent article got a lot of votes they may seem equal under the current system.

Under a better voting structure we would see that one was moderate and the other profound.

[–]sawboss 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Do you envision the possibility of hierarchical categories of posts? If so, please stop.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I hear your opinion and will not obey.

Posts and comments are already hierarchical in a couple ways: Date, Votes, Insightful, Fun

There's already flair for a very limited form of labeling/categorizing.

We've actually discussed categories as a meta-level above Subs to help organize content.

There's even an initial colour-coded category scheme: https://infogalactic.com/info/SaidIt_Subs_Ending_2018

Among all the jibber jabber is great information. And if we can organize it for ourselves and others and the future then all the better.

No one is forcing you to be organized. Don't deny me the option to be.

Organization is good.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

IMDb is not broken with movie rankings 1-10

If we don't try we'll never know. If it sucks ass we can revert.

I agree with him that we could use better voting. I don't exactly align with how he's proposing it.

The second I arrived here 6 months ago I saw there was room for vast improvement to the over simplified Reddit model. If anything it's simplemindedness that has ruined Reddit. Ranked voting is not overly complicated.

potentially confusing voting system will not produce an atmosphere for community growth

Really? You have statistics, studies, evidence, and citations to prove this or is this just a malformed hunch?

Actually I keep recommending more advanced features like on the QxR forum. I even asked if we could port SaidIt to another forum that is still being developed by a wide community - Joomla, Drupal, TikiWiki, CopperMine, etc (the ones I know from 12 years ago - but I'm sure there are newer ones as good or better too).

That's my kind of fluff. Better statiistics.

I've never asked about peoples voting habbits. And I won't if/when we get ranked votes.

I'm not interested in any one person's votes. I'm interested in the hive mind results. Two posts that may get 20 votes now might have very different results with ranked votes. Then you could really separate the cream of the crop.

Sure there will be the few who think their stuff is 10/10 every time. Maybe it won't make a difference or maybe it will be a problem. Maybe it can be solved by turning off self votes or just ignoring them. Or force self-votes to be at 5/10 or maybe it's just the default. There are options and solutions.

We don't want our votes tracked.

"We"? Speak for yourself. And who said anything about that?

(I still don't see why not, but that's not what we're discussing.)

Organic free-speech platforms should be allowed to develop freely,

Yes. It should.

and without unnecessary complications.

Like roadblocks to progress fearful of complications without even seeing them.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Edit:. IMDb is a movie rating group. They do not discuss issues that affect state power, or corporate power.
IMDb probably doesn't have a free-speech platform.

Movies are often propaganda devices, so there's probably not a lot of supressive activity.

What rating does the movie "vaxxed" have at IMDb?

We don't want our votes tracked.

"We"? Speak for yourself. And who said anything about that?

Only a handful of people logged in here use their real names. I would consider it reckless, but to each their own.
Many come here because there is no email requirement.

Why do you suppose that is?

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Why would IMDB have or need or want a "free-speech platform"? Apples and oranges.

Votes are still votes and whether its simple or complex it can be politicized.

I don't see what the Vaxxed votes have to do with the price of tea in China.

Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe (2016) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5562652/ 5.5 / 10 from 3,686 votes.

I bet some are sock puppets. I bet some are brainwashed sheeple. With all the honest votes I bet there are A LOT of 1 star votes who haven't even seen it.

I've seen censorship on the Amazon owned IMDb. I used to read a lot of stuff about the movies I watched. Now I don't watch movies much anymore and certainly don't read IMDb when I have more interesting stuff on SaidIt.

IMDb is full of aliases too.

I don't know what your point is.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

You had brought up the IMDb voting format and stated that it wasn't broken with it's ratings.

Your follow-up indicates that IMDb has shill vulnerabilities, and suggest that they are likely exploited.

Having acknowledged this; why would we want to expose SaidIt to these same voting vulnerabilities?

These vulnerabilities do not exist with the current system.

We need to remain advocates for maximally resilient submission, commenting, and voting structures.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

SaidIt already has the same exact vulnerabilities, only different in the tallies.

Just because you don't see them doesn't mean they don't exist.

If anything getting better quality information about the voting process will expose infiltration.

If you see a bunch of 1/10 votes then you know it either sucked or a group is trying to game the system. Knowing that much at least then we can determine ways to solve that. Not knowing may allow unkown problems to fester.

We need to remain advocates for maximally resilient submission, commenting, voting structures, improving the site, and finding new and better ways to be transparent with information and statistics to better defend ourselves and provide quality experience and content.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

SaidIt already has the same exact vulnerabilities, only different in the tallies.

?

If you see a bunch of 1/10 votes then you know it either sucked or a group is trying to game the system. Knowing that much at least then we can determine ways to solve that. Not knowing may allow unkown problems to fester.

These are contradictory statements.

There are obvious differences.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Prove it.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

You've already pointed out the evidence.

If you see a bunch of 1/10 votes then you know it either sucked or a group is trying to game the system. Knowing that much at least then we can determine ways to solve that. Not knowing may allow unkown problems to fester.

The we don't have to deal with 1/10 voting shills. There's no reason to consider solutions to this problem. I've never heard of any group effectively splicing this problem.

This is a problem that currently doesn't exist at SaidIt.

Why would we want to invite this obvious problem into the forum?

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

That's not proof.