top 100 commentsshow all 130

[–]Vigte 12 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

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 -  (1 child)

I upvoted Vigte

[–]Vigte 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Vigte insightfuled FormosaOolong Vigte funnied FormosaOolong.

[–]magnora7[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

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 -  (1 child)

Froglich is my real name.

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

[–]Vigte 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

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 children)

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 -  (4 children)

Still want to know who Vigte7 is :p

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

I think it's the same person as Froglich who usually goes by censored.

Am I wrong?

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

Well it ain't fucking me!! lol!

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

Same initials as tuberculosis.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (7 children)

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 -  (2 children)

edit: magnora found it.

also, here is a sub on voat with the same everything:

[–]i_cansmellthat 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Woah...that's a long list.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Looks like a shill sleeper cell.

[–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

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 -  (1 child)

You may have been deceived...

Froglich is cunning...

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)


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 -  (0 children)

"Council of the People"

[–]useless_aether 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (33 children)

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

[–]d3rr 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

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.

Shall we put the block user link everywhere?

[–]useless_aether 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

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 -  (1 child)

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 -  (0 children)

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 -  (15 children)

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 -  (14 children)

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

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

Then I guess I mean use "Home" instead of "All".

[–]d3rr 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

...use subscribed rather than home/all.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Is there a difference between home/all?

[–]d3rr 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Not really, not a practical difference. Home has /s/ads filtered out. We have considered simplifying and making /s/all or /s/subscribed the home page. I personally like the idea of making the home page just include 50 subs or so, like the "best of Said it", our public face that just shows off our anti-corruption bent.

[–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)


I knew it was something.

Hate the idea of "the best of SaidIt". It's very subjective and isolating to some.

I'll reconsider when it becomes a problems and we're overrun with stuff like MartinTimothy and BlackMetal, and at that point I think a vote to exclude might be in order instead of a top-50 list.

If you do a top-50 list I'll just post everything in "news" to simultaneously give up and protest, whether it belongs in news or not.

If we want to embrace an anti-corruption identity we should discuss it, and I can make some imagery for SaidIt, and maybe you can persuade me on your selections.

While voting is easy on a voting/ranking forum, I'm not sure how much the voting app is actually used so much as the voices chiming in. Burning Man used to be run as an LLC owned by 6 people who all had veto power so it was entirely run by consensus. It wasn't easy but it was always by consensus. A 7th person would have made it a magnitude more complex. I don't expect SaidIt could ever be consensus built but it's nice to dream.

[–]useless_aether 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

no, still not good. checked again and i am not subbed to s/socialism, but your robin hood tax post shows up in both places! edit: by home you mean right?

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

I don't know.

I'm going off what I thought I learned from /u/magnora7 and /u/d3rr about the difference between "home" and "all" - but I never verified it. I suppose I should have checked or tested before commenting and opening my big mouth.

If you're unsubbed from /s/socialism and it still shows up you have two problems:

  1. The unsubscribe thingy is broken.

  2. You're unsubbed from socialism so you're A) missing out on some great news and insights, and/or B) an alt-right Libertard-Republican Nazi shill. ;)

[–]useless_aether 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

no, i am unsubbed, but i can still see everything :-) i am not missing out on anything! thats why i am not subbed i guess, whats the point.

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

Just teasing. I don't care if you're a libtard a repubtard a progtard a demtard or an anarchotard.

[–]magnora7[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It doesn't show up in the SUBSCRIBED button. I wish you would internalize the explanations a little better and type less.

The ALL and HOME buttons are the same, except HOME is missing a few subs that no one wants to see, like /s/ads.

[–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

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 -  (11 children)

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 -  (10 children)

How does wading through crap relate to transparent voting?

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

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.

[–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Now I see how you related it.

But the post didn't state that. I'm for more transparency regardless. If rigged Steemit has transparent voting, surely we can too.

And if folks are worried about transparency, privacy, etc. What about the fact that this whole site is open to potentially be web-scraped. magnora7 and d3rr could make it even easier and make RSS feeds for the "All New Posts" and "All New Comments" - as I suggested ( /s/SaidIt/comments/bon/rss_for_saidit_a_good_idea/ ) but no one commented on. And if that's problematic then what about embracing decentralization protocols and platforms?

Spamming and infiltration are different issues, that may be peripherally related but should be addressed separately IMHO.

Also, MartinTimothy is not the only dual identity here. /u/Froglich and /u/Vigte7 are spoof aliases. And those are just ones I know of. FYI, I have ONLY one user account or else I'd be making way more subs that the measly 1/week.

[–]useless_aether 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

sure, its all fun and games until the anonymity is maintained, b/c "there is no true free speech without true anonymity. " but doxing can be bad for you. we all have different levels of vulnerability.

[–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

"until"? I think you mean "as long as"

How are they going to doxx you from your votes?

[–]useless_aether 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

"until"? I think you mean "as long as"


How are they going to doxx you from your votes?

its information. big data + ai is a deadly combination. they do kill people with drones based on nothing else but metadata. voting records are metadata.

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

"They" also advertise at you based on data. It's long way from being a target of Amazon to a target of a missile.

If transparent votes on this site are that problematic then we've got bigger problems and we should all delete our accounts at once to survive.

I'd rather fight back than delete my account and I'd rather be radically courageous and dangerously bold and dare to make our voting transparent in the face of evil speaking my truth to power. (Hyperbolic much?) Rise up fellow netizens and embrace our fate to live free or die trying!!!

[–]OldManCorley 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (9 children)

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 -  (1 child)

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 -  (0 children)

An opinion coming from the alias of an alias.

[–]magnora7[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

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 -  (1 child)

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 -  (0 children)

Agreed, in hindsight.

[–]OldManCorley 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

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 -  (0 children)

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.

[–]YoungBriteEyedCorley 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

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

[–]Mnemonic 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

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 -  (1 child)

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 -  (0 children)

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 -  (8 children)

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 -  (7 children)

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.


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 -  (6 children)

"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 : " 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.

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

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 -  (0 children)

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 -  (0 children)

Magnora7 and d3rr.

Old Man Corley had me rethinking my previous position.

[–]wizzwizz4 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (46 children)

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.

[–]d3rr 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (38 children)

How would this voting diversity score work?

[–]Mnemonic 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

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 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

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

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Were MartinTimothy's votes skewing anything significantly?

[–]wizzwizz4 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Causing content to show up on the front page that consistently gets exactly 4 votes but everybody who comments (other than MT socks) dislikes.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)


I wonder if exactly 4 votes is all it takes these days.

[–]wizzwizz4 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

If you keep churning out spam several times daily, the novelty is enough to weight the algorithm to keep it on the front page.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)


[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

magnora7 Use magic to fix this please.

[–]Jesus 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The guy had like 200 sock accounts on reddit.

[–]wizzwizz4 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (27 children)

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 -  (4 children)

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 -  (3 children)

We could add a daily post vote limit.

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

Fuck that.

I need endless votes.

I vote when it doesn't mean I voted for their idea.

For example, I voted for every single comment in the post.


To mark that I read it.

If anyone responds to my comments I'll be called back.

When there are any new comments I can easily spot and read them too.


What do you do when you don't vote on a day because you barely visit or don't visit SaidIt, yet on another day you have all day on SaidIt but run out of votes?

QxR limits their votes/rewards. LAME.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

That's terrible! /u/magnora7 Please add a "read" mark to the feature requests list so JasonCarswell doesn't have to keep doing this.

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

I agree.

LOL. At first glance I thought my voting habit on long threads was a problem for you and you were trying to affect my votes, (as if you could), by tattling on me. Then I reread it. :P

[–]d3rr 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (21 children)

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 -  (20 children)

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

[–]d3rr 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

Yeah, I'm saying I don't think it can be stopped altogether. I'm certainly willing to hear out potential solutions though.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

Full transparency (except the aliases) should be the way.

This issue is shockingly overblown IMHO.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

I'd like to hear your proposed solution. If we're all overthinking it, please let us know before the programming starts.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

100% transparency. There's no reason to hide a vote. That's some old fashioned American cock and bull stuff we even practice in Canada. Unless there are thugs threatening you to vote a certain way it should not matter who knows.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

You of all people should know that it's not just thugs who can manipulate your vote (better) if it's known to them, and if you know it's known to them.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)


[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Please, tell your solution.

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

100% transparency.

[–]wizzwizz4 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Which would turn Saidit into yet another data mine.

Do you have any thought-through ideas?

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It already is.

100% transparency is 100% thought through.

Do you?

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

None 100% thought through, because I don't consider that practically possible for non-trivial things.

But yes, I have actual actionable ideas, and I've been sharing them.

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

I agree to disagree.

[–]fred_red_beans 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

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 -  (1 child)

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 -  (0 children)

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

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I want as much transparency as possible.