There have been several threads of the Ask HN nature about the new HN interface that doesn't show comment karma scores by default. The site founder, pg, asked for suggestions on how to "stave off decline of HN" in a thread he opened 31 days ago.
noting that he might change settings back and forth as the experiment continued. About two days later he opened a simple yes/no poll about the current experiment
The latest long comment thread about the experiment included several comments suggesting that voting power be separated from being able to view comment karma scores directly. (In other words, a user setting would choose whether the user wants to see comment karma scores or be able to vote on comments.) I thought about that issue for a few days, off-site. It seems to me that there are several possible responses to the suggestion that voting power be separated from visibility of comment karma scores. Perhaps the learned readers here can suggest other possible responses, and analyze which makes the most sense.
Should Voting Power Be an Option Separated from Viewing Comment Karma Scores?
1) Yes, then some readers can skim threads for information, while others vote on comments, and everyone is happy.
2) Yes, because readers can skim threads for information, even if that inconveniences voters.
3) No, because comment karma scores are misleading as a guide to what to read. (See pg's post from just before when the experiment began.)
4) No, because everyone should be able to vote, and everyone should have a clue about which comments have a high score (through colors or fonts or approximate scores).
5) No, because the interface should be like it was last month, when everyone could see comment karma scores and could vote based on personal karma.
6) No, because HN users will use sockpuppets to get around any such distinction between viewing karma and voting.
Personally, I haven't committed myself to any one position on this issue, or indeed even committed myself to an opinion on whether this is a fitting way to look at how to improve the site or not. I defer to the site founder on all issues of site governance. I have found HN largely to be a worthwhile website for my 898 days as a registered user, and my interest is mostly to make sure that the site founder and the members of his volunteer editor ("curator") team
He wrote, "The problem has several components: comments that are (a) mean and/or (b) dumb that (c) get massively upvoted."
That's still the key issue. If some change of voting rules or comment karma visibility brings about higher scores for good comments, and lower scores for mean, dumb, or other bad comments, that is helpful to all readers of HN. Feel free to review the site guidelines
for guidance on what is desired here and thus guidance on how to vote.
P.S. The last time there was a long thread discussing voting rules, some users wondered out loud about whether or not registering a new account requires reading the guidelines before voting. It does not, as I found out the other day by using a university library terminal that doesn't have my cookies stored to register a noob experiment account. A brand-new account has upvoting power immediately, and has a link to the welcome page shown on the top navigation bar, where it may be noticed (as I noticed it) or may not.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2403696
He then announced the current experiment of not showing comment karma scores 23 days ago,
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2434333
noting that he might change settings back and forth as the experiment continued. About two days later he opened a simple yes/no poll about the current experiment
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2445039
and 14 days ago he replied to a question with a preliminary report on how voting behavior has changed.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2465271
The latest long comment thread about the experiment included several comments suggesting that voting power be separated from being able to view comment karma scores directly. (In other words, a user setting would choose whether the user wants to see comment karma scores or be able to vote on comments.) I thought about that issue for a few days, off-site. It seems to me that there are several possible responses to the suggestion that voting power be separated from visibility of comment karma scores. Perhaps the learned readers here can suggest other possible responses, and analyze which makes the most sense.
Should Voting Power Be an Option Separated from Viewing Comment Karma Scores?
1) Yes, then some readers can skim threads for information, while others vote on comments, and everyone is happy.
2) Yes, because readers can skim threads for information, even if that inconveniences voters.
3) No, because comment karma scores are misleading as a guide to what to read. (See pg's post from just before when the experiment began.)
4) No, because everyone should be able to vote, and everyone should have a clue about which comments have a high score (through colors or fonts or approximate scores).
5) No, because the interface should be like it was last month, when everyone could see comment karma scores and could vote based on personal karma.
6) No, because HN users will use sockpuppets to get around any such distinction between viewing karma and voting.
Personally, I haven't committed myself to any one position on this issue, or indeed even committed myself to an opinion on whether this is a fitting way to look at how to improve the site or not. I defer to the site founder on all issues of site governance. I have found HN largely to be a worthwhile website for my 898 days as a registered user, and my interest is mostly to make sure that the site founder and the members of his volunteer editor ("curator") team
http://ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html
continue to enjoy the site and find it useful for themselves. They are doing a good job, and I want them to have incentive to keep up the good work.
When pg wrote his recent post "Ask HN: How to stave off decline of HN?"
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2403696
He wrote, "The problem has several components: comments that are (a) mean and/or (b) dumb that (c) get massively upvoted."
That's still the key issue. If some change of voting rules or comment karma visibility brings about higher scores for good comments, and lower scores for mean, dumb, or other bad comments, that is helpful to all readers of HN. Feel free to review the site guidelines
http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
and the site welcome message
http://ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
for guidance on what is desired here and thus guidance on how to vote.
P.S. The last time there was a long thread discussing voting rules, some users wondered out loud about whether or not registering a new account requires reading the guidelines before voting. It does not, as I found out the other day by using a university library terminal that doesn't have my cookies stored to register a noob experiment account. A brand-new account has upvoting power immediately, and has a link to the welcome page shown on the top navigation bar, where it may be noticed (as I noticed it) or may not.