1
1657
1658

In regards to the recent changes (imgur.com)

submitted by Gameofmoans69x8

sorted by:
best
best
トップ
新着
注目
論争中
古い順
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]rocketvat 29 ポイント30 ポイント

The thing is, this isn't changing the system into something else (like altering default subs) or adding a bunch of new gated features (gold), this is simply taking away a feature that has always existed and used by many people.

Why would we withhold judgment? Am I going to suddenly love that a feature I've always liked is gone? I will get over it, but this attitude I've seen parroted in these threads strikes me as absurd.

[–]spearmintier 14 ポイント15 ポイント

Yeah but the feature wasn't real. It was made up numbers with 50% error rates being common. How is that helpful?

[–]Doctor_McKay 23 ポイント24 ポイント

Even if the numbers aren't precise, there's a huge difference between (1|0) and (101|100). One means your comment wasn't seen, and the other means that your comment was controversial.

Lots of mods also used the numbers to count votes in contest threads, ignoring downvotes.

[–]Meepster23 -2 ポイント-1 ポイント

So maybe do the same thing they did for links and just put a percentage in there and a "not enough data" or something for less then 10 votes or something?

[–]Alinosburns 4 ポイント5 ポイント

A percentage is still useless though. I have no idea if 1000's have voted and agreed or the bare minimum for enough data.

[–]Meepster23 -3 ポイント-2 ポイント

What does it matter? What additional information do you get out of hundreds vs thousands of votes?

[–]Alinosburns 2 ポイント3 ポイント

Because on a smaller sub. where the most votes on anything might be a 100.

If your threshold is too high. Then you'll never have enough data for anything. To low and then you have no idea if it's 10:0 or 100:90 since they both read the same thing.

When you start getting in the range of +100 scores it's probably less relevant.

But for the smaller subs. This completely fucks them in the comment sections.

The fact is the change only needed to affect thread titles not comment sections.

Or even better, Allow the subreddit moderators to choose the option for their subreddit.

The main page and the default settings will all reflect the primary changes. And instead allow the up/down counters to be shown as part of a subreddit style.

That way, to the outside eyes the site looks more positive(I've never heard anyone who is on reddit alot claim the up/down system makes the site look negative, It's clearly a result of outside eyes coming in and questioning why Morgan Freeman's AMA has so many downvotes_

While still keeping the numbers intact for the subreddits who have crafted their sub around them.

[–]Meepster23 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Well I already replied to you on this sort of in the other comments below, but if it's done by subscribers with a max cap of say 50 (pulled from thin air) votes before it gives percentages, then it would solve the problem of smaller subs.

(I've never heard anyone who is on reddit alot claim the up/down system makes the site look negative, It's clearly a result of outside eyes coming in and questioning why Morgan Freeman's AMA has so many downvotes

I don't think that's true as many people people "downvotes really?" or "who would down vote this?" and stuff on posts that are just being fuzzed by reddit and not necessarily actually downvoted.

Fact of the matter is, that the actual numbers were fairly meaningless anyway since it was fuzzed and only gave a rough idea of how many people had voted but nothing really meaningful.

Maybe they should do the percentage on comments as well along with an indicator of the number of votes by range. And that range could be customizable by the mods of each subreddit. Like an indicator of low for one sub might be between 1 and 100 votes while another sub might be low for 1-10 and medium from 11-25 etc.

[–]Doctor_McKay 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Well, a percentage alone wouldn't help much since both (1|1) and (50|50) are both 50%.

[–]Meepster23 -2 ポイント-1 ポイント

Which is why I said they should put "not enough data" if it's less then a certain vote threshold. After a point does it matter if 100 people voted both ways for 100/100 or 500/500. It's still 50% either way the total vote numbers only fuels the ego of "hey people are paying attention to me".

[–]Alinosburns 2 ポイント3 ポイント

kinda. especially depending on where the minimum threshold is.

And the problem is it still fucks over the smaller subs which only ever get 10-50 votes on any comments. For them a 15:5 score is still useful due to the size of the community.

[–]Meepster23 1 ポイント2 ポイント

Maybe that's exactly how they could calculate the minimum threshold, based on the number of subscribers with a top end cap or something.

[–]spearmintier -3 ポイント-2 ポイント

But the numbers weren't even remotely accurate. I'm not sure if comments are different but the announcement was saying front page posts would look like only 55% of people upvoted when in reality it was 95%. So things looked more controversial than they were. It seems like the problem is that comments lack the % system they gave the posts?

[–]third-eye-brown -4 ポイント-3 ポイント

If you really care about this, you definitely spend way too much time here. Try finding something in your actual life to care about.

[–]RandyMarshIsMyHero 1 ポイント2 ポイント

Yet here you are posting...

[–]rocketvat 0 ポイント1 ポイント

The "made up numbers" refers to vote counts on submissions, not comments. And no one cares about vote counts on highly ranked submissions, so that argument is entirely specious. I was really disappointed that reddit admins tried to conflate the two in their announcement, because now I see this "fact" parroted everywhere too. It's just not true.

There's some evidence in vote fuzzing on comments above a certain threshold (100 or 500 votes), but even then you're getting the magnitude of the voting if not the exact count-- it's not like the numbers on RES were +123123/-123122 on a comment with 1 karma. And at lower levels of voting it was highly accurate. And really, that's where it was of most use to begin with.

[–]funkerton 0 ポイント1 ポイント

In smaller subreddits, which many of us frequent and moderate, the numbers were actually very precise. The vote fuzzing doesn't kick in until a certain number of upvotes and a lot of subreddits don't have any posts that cross that threshold so the numbers are accurate. They are fucking over lot of redditors whether they realize it or not.

[–]wu2ad 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Because it isn't your place to judge. Grumble all you like, but the guy's original point was that it isn't appropriate for people to scream mass exodus for benign feature changes like these, and there are those people out there. You use a service that enriches your life for free, so it's probably appropriate to chill out about minor inconveniences.

You know what's really absurd though? People like the other guy responding to you comparing the reddit admin team to the US Government. There's idiots on every side of the fence.

[–]rocketvat 0 ポイント1 ポイント

No one is seriously screaming mass exodus. They are talking about witholding their money for the site. The extra money that they are essentially donating, that they have every right to withold if the site isn't being run the way they want it to. And that doesn't make them irrational in any way.

And this isn't a benign change, it's a negative one that genuinely impacts my experience. Maybe it doesn't impact yours, but it impacts thousands of people. Am I going to go running through the streets? No. Am I going to stop coming to reddit? No. But what I am going to do (and in fact just did 20 minutes ago), is go to my paypal account and disable the gold membership I've had running literally since the day they introduced the feature. Because other than talking about it here it's the only way I have to express my disagreement with this decision, and I'm going to exercise it.

[–]jcannon98188 0 ポイント1 ポイント

If you like reddit you must take all changes happily. It is the same line of reasoning that says "If you are American, you must agree with what the American Government says, and if you don't like it you can leave!"