Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday September 16 2014, @12:58PM   Printer-friendly
from the mod-me-up! dept.

An article posted by Cory Doctorow on Boing Boing http://boingboing.net/2014/09/15/downvoting-considered-harmful.html has interesting insight into moderation:

A study http://cs.stanford.edu/people/jure/pubs/disqus-icwsm14.pdf [PDF] published in a journal of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence found that sites that have a "downvote" button to punish bad comments lock the downvoted users into spirals of ever-more-prolific, ever-lower-quality posting due to a perception of having been martyred by the downvoters.

Cory continues: What's more, positive attention for writing good posts acts as less of an incentive to write more good stuff than the incentive to write bad stuff that's produced by negative attention.

How Community Feedback Shapes User Behavior http://cs.stanford.edu/people/jure/pubs/disqus-icwsm14.pdf [Justin Cheng, Cristian Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, Jure Leskovec]

Why Reddit sucks: some scientific evidence http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/09/09/why-reddit-sucks-some-scientific-evidence/ [Henry Farrell/Washington Post]

So... do you downvote? if so, why? Does this article make you reconsider your down-modding?

[Editor's note: I offer for your consideration and commentary our very own SoylentNews Moderation FAQ.]

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 16 2014, @03:05PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 16 2014, @03:05PM (#94045)

    Most of the time though +5's are lazy 5's. Most of the time it is 'yeah I agree with that'. Instead of that really adds to the conversation. So that is why I will downvote myself. Its not because it actually is a good point but because I am spouting off my opinion. I many times do not use my points. Because I think the conversation is rated correctly.

    Groupthink is limited to those cases where a lot of people believe something that they cannot or will not independently verify
    As someone who has a degree in economics (a degree I argue is only useful for arguing on the internet). I see many bad decisions done by the group. Some of them are simply political (e.g. my team vs your team). Some of them are jealously (e.g. "I dont think someone should have that much money"). Some of them are greed (e.g. "I dont want that applied to me if I come into money"). Some of them are basic misunderstandings of what economics is (i.e. the study of scarcity and plentiful and the effects on value). The group however is not going to change its mind. Why should they? Its just an internet post and you are dealing with raw emotion not facts.

    Insisting that we don't fly because we're pushed down to the Earth by the Noodly Appendages of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, isn't fighting against the oppressive groupthink of gravity
    That is more insulting of the readers intelligence and trying to pull the conversation into something you want to talk about. Which is the existence of God. There are plenty of discussion boards where you can take your pick of how you feel about it.

    It is more of an affect that people are mostly smart. However, they are also wildly stupid. They learn how to do something very well they then misapply their knowledge of being good at something to thinking that they are good at everything.

    So that is why I downvote myself. People misattribute a point they agree with, with something that should drown out all other POV's.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1