6

An idea for altering the vote counts to improve engagement

Submitted by ziq in Postmill (edited )

Since postmill sites are all small-scale, the votes can be incredibly low, which ends up hurting the sites because it makes them look like they have no activity / engagement, which itself leads to less activity / engagement like a self-fulfilling prophecy.

My idea is that the vote counts shouldn't just be about how many people upvoted the post, but also how many comments and views and comment upvotes the post got. It should represent engagement as a whole rather than just direct votes.

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

3

bloodrose wrote

The only problem with this approach is that if someone is saying something awful and everyone responds telling said person what they said was awful, that post then has a higher engagement; even if the engagement is "hey, fuck off." Is there a way to control for that? Downvotes?

3

ziq wrote

Yeah downvotes. If something is being mass downvoted, that should be weighed into the score heavily.

2

0w0 wrote

I think that votes should be there but the numbers should be hidden, exept maybe to the moderators so they can identify problematic posts.

1

0w0 wrote

Also it would be neat to sort posts in most voted during a day or hour.

2

surreal wrote (edited )

posts with most recent comments and views. i never liked up/down voting on any social platform.

this is not something easy to implement and it would require some trial and error

2

Fossidarity wrote

How about using colors instead of numbers?

2

ziq wrote (edited )

Sounds interesting but there are so many different themes so the colors wouldn't be consistent.

2

rot wrote

Sort by new then rank by most commented.Then remove votes on posts. That way everything is mostly in chronological order but the posts that have the most discourse are favored. This should make finding posts easy but we'll have to learn to ignore trolls to avoid pushing them to the top. Keep votes on comments.

2

md_ wrote

Just remove it altogether. There should not be "Hot", "Top", and "Controversial" tabs.

1

ziq wrote

Idk, that would make it harder to find stuff. Avoiding hierarchy doesn't really make sense in the context of sorting articles in a database. Not all articles are equal.

2

md_ wrote

I don't like the idea of someone else curating my reading, be it other people, or a machine. I just go for /new all the time.

In addition, it seems that there's a tendency in a lot of people to get too invested on scores like that, creating a lot of personal strife for them.

So imv, post scoring is useless, and it seems to upset people. That's (ironically) -2 for post scoring. What are the upsides of keeping it?

1

ziq wrote (edited )

But what if you want to read articles from months or years ago? /Top is the best way to go about finding good older articles.

So imv, post scoring is useless, and it seems to upset people. That's (ironically) -2 for post scoring. What are the upsides of keeping it?

I agree and that's why I'd like the system to better reward engagement with the site.

If it didn't have voting altogether it would just be a regular message board instead of a link aggregation site, and that's not why people come here. They want a reddit replacement.

2

md_ wrote

But what if you want to read articles for months or years ago?

Maybe indexing by month/arbitrary time period would be a good feature request then. /Top is only incidentally covering that need, it's not why it exists.

I'd like the system to reward engagement

I don't think that Raddle should introduce a system of psychological conditioning.

If it didn't have voting altogether it would just be a regular message board

That's a positive, in my book.

and that's not why people come here

Not everyone, surely.

2

ziq wrote

I don't think that Raddle should introduce a system of psychological conditioning.

It already does that and when people get downvoted, they get anxiety. I've seen it happen countless times. If the system upvotes everyone, that won't be a problem.

That's a positive, in my book.

It's not what postmill is tho, the software is a link aggregator.

Not everyone, surely.

At least 95% of people. Most people that come here don't even comment or even make an account, they're only here for the articles.

2

md_ wrote

It already does that and when people get downvoted, they get anxiety. I've seen it happen countless times. If the system upvotes everyone, that won't be a problem.

There's for sure some extra psychological effect caused by seeing negative numbers, but I'm pretty sure that it would persist even if only positive numbers are used.

It's not what postmill is tho, the software is a link aggregator.

Postmill has text-posts (even links are text posts with a featured external link), and threaded discussions. Non-chronological ordering of forum threads is a relatively new idea, but it doesn't radically depart from what we generally call a forum board.

At least 95% of people. Most people that come here don't even comment or even make an account, they're only here for the articles.

I don't think any usability will be taken away from those people if externally-imposed curation goes away.

3

ziq wrote (edited )

I don't think any usability will be taken away from those people if externally-imposed curation goes away.

When I go to a reddit sub for the first time, the first thing I do is click /top - all time - so I can see the best that sub has to offer. I think that is pretty common here too. No one wants to sort through 100 pages of articles with 1 - 3 upvotes to find the best stuff.

2

ziq wrote

And it's kind of our job to curate the articles with our votes and comments. Or why use a link aggregator at all? Just go to duckduckgo.

2

md_ wrote (edited )

And it's kind of our job to curate

I don't know why there's this sense of obligation. People are free to choose what they read and what they skip. I don't read all posts that show up in my RSS reader for example.

I understand that I have a very different use for forums with link posts than other people, and as long as /new is kept, I am not that affected by the changes (other than having to see people get hurt by the psychological effects of being rated by their peers, which makes me skip coming to Raddle for a week at a time, because it's hard to watch).

But yeah, for me Raddle, and Reddit in the past, are discussion boards. From time to time you discover a new blog someone links in a forum post, but that's not the main function of a forum imv. If curating went away, the downvote anxiety attacks would go away, and discussions will improve.