I define "karma" as a means of valuing your contributions to the community, and it seems that this ought not be dominated simply by what you contribute in a literal sense, but also in what you contribute by encouraging others by voting up their valuable contributions. If our definitions differ, I can see that being the cause of the disagreement.
For an exploration of similar ideas, take a clicky: http://www.nplusonemag.com/?q=node/473 (I actually think I might have seen here first, but forgotten to save it...)
In other words, if you want to look at this in absolutes and think that when I say that I think it's a good idea to take a given variable into account that I am somehow implying that the variable is free of all bias and in every other way perfect, you are making a mistake. You will never have high confidence for all of your variables when they describe human interaction, but that low confidence doesn't speak to the utility of the variable, it speaks to its importance in the overall calculation.
If you boil it down, my point is that while "do people like what I say?" is a suboptimal scoring criterion, "do most other people like the same things I say I like?" is likely to be significantly worse.
Startup Y Combinator startup Lisp Paul Graham startup startup hacker startup.
Why is it just because you've been around for 5 years that your opinions should be greater than those of someone of 5 minutes? or that they should be greater than those who are too busy to spend every waking moment on HN. This would actually allow trolls who have nothing better to do to have better karma than those who actually make intelligent comments.
I think the karma system is fine, and in fact better than some others. The only thing I'd change is the # of karma points something need to get into the rss feed.
I'm not too great at networking or being recognized, but I'm working on it. In your case, I can tell you that if some guy came up off the street and introduced himself as Dan Goldin, I'd recognize you from here. Whether that would be worth anything to you is another story. ;)
(I guess I'm trying to say that the karma system doesn't matter so much as making an honest effort to say something worth saying.)
Maybe if you can wrap something up in a product it would be a good opportunity.
Some things I've been thinking about:
- Reward the early karma givers more than the latter to avoid the pile on (maybe give each poster a karma amount equal to a function of the karma given to the same post after them). So if I am the first one to upvote something, and the post ends up with 20 karma points, I get a f(20) or f(19) karma, depending whether I want to include myself.
- Give people a daily karma limit which is based on their current karma score
- Back in my early school days when I used Word I used to like having my papers rated on the "Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level" and was always trying to get the perfect score of 12. Maybe something like that could be included but that may be overkill - probably let it be entirely user driven.
- The ultimate purpose is to keep everything balanced and make the new users feel involved without being limited too much, so a lot of these ideas may need to be tested.
Identifying the value from the nonsense however may take a bit of effort for some people. I do believe that this is still an excellent resource for viable opinions.