You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →


[–] logos_ethos 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Remember when one of these trolls forgot to change alts before posting? Some of these users post things that are intentionally going to attract downvoats so that they can farm upvoats on other accounts. Their other accounts would reply to the mass downvoated comment with a comment that the community appreciates, and receive upvoats for it.

The 10 post per day limits the ability to upvoat farm like this, which is spamming the website & looks just like some of these infamous accounts that always attract downvoats and complain about the 10 posts per day limit posting restriction. Unfortunately, we have nothing to detect the pattern of accounts that are run by the same person/group to receive upvoats. And I do not want there to be anything that will make real privacy concerns worse.

For example, I do not think that we want to add an IP address hash to each post. But there is another idea that does not affect privacy: If someone's CPP mostly came from comments that were replies to a downvoated comment, then that would be a red flag on their account. I suspect that if the community simply stopped rewarding replies to trolls with upvoats, then this problem will be less of an issue (although they might spam more to make up for the difference if they need to meet their quota of new accounts that can downvoat).


[–] 12294185? 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

I think the proper solution to this issue is community awareness. Attempting to control for such cases will just end up punishing innocent users.


[–] logos_ethos 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

People who are new to a community are sometimes advised to lurk until they become familiar with the website and the community. Since we are much better at not using the down button to express disagreement than the other website, I do not think that the users who are being punished by our current rules are being punished unfairly. The offenders who complain about the 10 posts per day limit are clearly disruptive & make no attempt at empathy. By definition, they are not going to try to better themselves. Why do we need to go out of our way to let them violate good etiquette? We have a different style of moderation, and its continued existence requires some degree of protection from subterfuge & subversion. As we get waves of new users from a website that is many times larger than this one, we need some automation of this. It is just the system enforcing good netizen etiquette. It may not be perfect all of the time, but, in the long run (when users who join after today make up the bulk of this website), it is much better than any alternative that I can conceive of. I do not want this website to follow in the other website's footsteps.