Hacker News Karma Tracker
hn-karma-tracker.herokuapp.com
hn-karma-tracker.herokuapp.com
> Speed percentile: 98.82%
While I have to acknowledge that some instinctive/animalistic part of me is excited at being in this percentile, it also prompts me to remember that karma is effectively worthless and I really need to get busy on class work and research...
It's really strange the impact something silly like karma has, because I tell myself I'm above accumulating imaginary points on the internet, but obviously, I don't seem to be.
In some ways, it's curious. My highest rated comments aren't what I would consider my best. Instead, they are ones that appeal to a wide audience with some kind of emotional (rather than technical) insight. My last comment, a quip about about how every programmer thinks they're the best, was worth 64 points. However, a detailed post I wrote on molecular dynamics simulation where I fact-checked and reviewed the literature was only worth 3 points. Go figure.
EDIT: After thinking about it some more, I've decided karma isn't entirely worthless in real life. It is a metric that lets you know how well other people like your written work. Over time, I've slowly come to realize what will get upvoted and what will not. This ability could have interesting repercussions in the way I write about my research, or the way that I craft something like grant or fellowship applications. Every person is different, but posting on HN reveals to me that, in the aggregate, there are certain things you can say that have a certain appeal to others, and the capacity to recognize this could in fact be useful in many life situations.
I definitely feel you here. This is a trend I see absolutely everywhere; hell, I was surprised to find out it even extends into video games that implement this kind of voting system.
This problem feels like it could be solvable by changing the "meaning" of the upvote. Right now, the upvote is a tool that allows you to make a comment more visible and to throw a bone to the author in the form of karma. People probably feel inclined to "tip" someone who makes a clever or witty comment with the karma from the upvote. On top of that, people making witty comments who get upvoted are now encouraged to make more witty and unproductive comments because they know that they will get karma for it.
The issue is that the upvote represents general approval of a comment, rather than a nod of the head that a comment is productive or insightful.
Just throwing around ideas - maybe the elimination of the user-karma-tracking system altogether is a reasonable solution?
And I think the upvote is pretty much set in stone now. It's essentially "I like this post" or "I don't like this post", there's not much nuance.
You shouldn't downvote a comment because it "has too many points." If you think a post deserves a downvote, do so. Whether 25 or five or zero people before you thought so shouldn't play any role in how you perceive the quality of that post.
That allows you to establish both what you like the site to have in it, and how you much you liked this instance of it. Perfect would mean simply that "spot on" or "this."
The second part of the system would then adjust the presentation of your karma (to you and others) unscaled vector along the line to the 'perfect' site in the context of the viewer.
To use a simple example, lets say HN was over run with cat pictures, and I thought they were the best so I vote like this and "+1" (up and to the right), You the reader hate cat pictures so you always vote down/less like this.
So we've created virtual root nodes at +loves cat pictures and one at +hates cat pictures. Now I can plot your karma as negative with respect to mine if we assume that the center point between your root nexus and mine is 0. Now do this with enough topics and you get multiple consituencies all in the same discussion space where your view of their karma will inform you how likely it is you'll like to read what they wrote :-)
The relative-karma system you described could work with one-axis karma, though. Interesting idea.
Karma's value to the casual visitor is in communicating quality content that's been flagged by the community worker bees - the karma "waggle dance" :) From that perspective you want to be critical and only add weight to the "best things".
However karma also plays a very significant role in guiding people as to how to modify their behaviour such that the community appreciates them. We all want to be liked by communities we identify with and karma is a powerful tool to see how we can "fit in".
Karma is an incredibly powerful tool to communicate in a very discrete way to new community members how they can establish themselves.
As the karma-moderator I find myself looking to give the community ways award karma wherever I can. I'm not worried about how insignificant the effort that it was rewarding; all I want to do is give people encouragement when they do something (anything) the community appreciates.
This is good for building a sense of community where in-person interaction is infeasible, but it also brings with it the bad qualities (group think, punishment of new ideas that contradict the norm, cliques, personality cults, etc).
The good news is that there are oddballs in every group who ignore the social rules (karma) and present ideas that are novel (but perhaps unpalatable) to the group despite the meting out of punishments (which are ignored). They are the antibodies that fight off the cancerous growth of tribalism.
What is sometimes a struggle is that better writing is not always what we wish it would be. Sometimes is well reasoned explanations. Sometimes it is passionate argument. And often, highly rated comments and articles become highly rated because of timing. Sometimes it is just showing up (80% of the time, Woody Allen may have said).
It's satisfying to make a pitch perfect comment - even more so I find when it isn't snark or mean. I know what my best comments have been, and I know these are not the same as my highest rated. My best comments have been ones that I've cared about and some of those have even gone negative.
Here's an experiment of mine from a couple of months ago, on a duplicate news post:
http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/comments&q=anthon...
Do I really deserve that 69 points of karma? Is that 20 or 30 or 69 times more valuable than other posts where I've spent a lot more effort?
Perhaps this is where some of the 'snark' is coming from. In the race to get more karma, people are looking for the cheap throwaway one liner that everyone will snicker at and upvote.
Also, Karma on news submissions has become a race to be the first to publish the latest techcrunch news or related sites, so it's not all about comments or contents.
It doesn't seem surprising to me. It takes effort to recognize quality, most people aren't going to bother. It makes sense that quality is hard to measure, because if it weren't it would most likely be easier to produce. Perhaps the score should be corrected for length and how deep in the thread a comment is, but getting it right is probably more trouble than it's worth.
The Slashdot comment system tries to correct this by awarding karma to "interesting" or "insightful" comments and not giving karma points to users with "funny" comments. Of course, the downside to this is that the poster of a comment that many find to be funny can end up with bad karma because one "flamebait" mod counts for more than six "funny" mods.
The problem with Slashdot is comments that are flat out wrong are often moderated as insightful. This probably happens because moderators feel obligated to upvote what they perceive to be "intelligent" comments even when they are not qualified to judge them as such.
The problem with Slashdot you cite is interesting. It is related to more general problems with crowdsourcing. Wikipedia is successful but sometimes you really notice that an article is written by different people with different viewpoints. Similarly, a "democratic" model for science, where instead of peer review papers are upvoted, does not seem very attractive.
Perhaps this all boils down to the notion that neither truth nor quality are democratic; i.e., the average opinion is not a good estimate of them.
Come to think of it, that does transfer to both business and academia to some extent.
In academia this is becoming a common strategy with the rise of metrics. Find a hot area, publish a paper with a linkbaity title and prominent keyword placement, and wait for the citations to roll in. In business, it's the strategy of choosing your field of endeavor by picking the places where the most money is flowing around, and then just doing something average in that space.
Moreover, most of them were pretty constructive: things like explaining how to generalize pattern-matching, how typeclasses are useful, what FRP is or even just how your editor can display Haskell syntax with Unicode. (It's like an awesome version of syntax highlighting.)
Admittedly, my single highest-scoring post was a bit less constructive: a rant about Go. However, in my defense, it was a long rant with substantial details and examples. And, honestly, I'd be extremely happy if it saved some people from learning Go and got them to consider Haskell or OCaml instead.
I think the most karma I ever got was from being the first to post about Sublime Text 2. This was interesting but I only got the karma because I beat everyone else by a few seconds. I feel that's far less valuable than the odd thing I've spotted which no one else would have ever come across.
In the same way, I wonder how many people have high karma just because they are one of the first to comment on popular submissions.
Edit: typo (I wonder how proof reading my comment more would have affect my karma)
The current user interface on Hacker News proper shows a leader board
http://news.ycombinator.com/leaders
and discloses total karma and recent comment karma average on each user's user profile, e.g.,
http://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=tokenadult
But this interface offers more, and prompts me to look up some fellow users to see what their detailed statistics look like. As I expected, cwan, who gains almost all of his karma from submissions rather than comments, has a higher percentile than anyone else who began participating here in the same month.
AFTER EDIT: Link to an old discussion I tried to stir up, on a topic which other users are discussing in this thread, "Ask HN: What Kinds of Comments Should Be Upvoted?"
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1065084
I'm always interested in how to emphasize the positive by upvoting early and often when I see good stuff here, so I like to hear opinions from all of you about what is good stuff.
P.S. By following the links from the submitted site, I am reminded that patio11 and I seem to have the same join date. I'm honored to be behind him in any ranking that includes the both of us.
Then there's a gap of three months months before the early adopters: https://hn-karma-tracker.herokuapp.com/month/february-2007.
That makes 6 years of HN... time flies!
Also, the see-your-data feature fails on Safari.
I just anecdotally see karma peasants post comments that are functionally identical to comments from the karma kings, and the peasants just get buried at the bottom. It would interesting to have some kind of NLP-based crawler go through HN and see to what extent that actually happens though...maybe it's just my imagination.
Then there are effects as I've seen in some of the Stack Exchange sites. One that comes to mind is ServerFault. Moderators and high-karma members with elevated privileges have turned that particular site into a nearly unusable and hostile environment for anyone outside a very narrow definition of what the "gang" wants.
This is an interesting effect because it encodes what a few privileged users want as opposed to what --conjecture-- a larger majority might be looking for out of the site. And, from a strict business view of the problem it reduces that audience and the applicability of the site/s by a potentially significant factor.
It's like having a mechanical engineering site where high-karma users have decided they only want to discuss hex bolts used by aircraft mechanics. You show-up to ask about hex bolts used on motorcycles and watch out!
Perhaps the ultimate questions --on a site-per-site basis-- might be:
- What's the design intent behind karma or user reputation?
- What is it you want to encode?
- How do you ensure that this is, in fact, encoded into the rating?
- How do you prevent users from polluting or de-valuing karma through
misinterpretation, petty/spiteful voting, "gang-like" behavior or other
degenerations?
- If karma is used to elevate user rights, how does it also affect
responsibilities? Does it impose a level of accountability?
- How do you keep karma "wars" from affecting your community? By this I
mean gang-like behavior by regulars who'll attack outside their pack
with the only tool they have, karma.
- How to you keep karma from affecting site business?
- Short of the benevolent dictator model, is there a better approach to
encoding user value, participation or relevance?
Not an easy problem to solve as most communities have discovered. For the most part HN seems to regulate rather nicely. We are all guilty of veering off here and there but eventually things come back to a reasonable center. Maybe it's because posts age very quickly and it takes a lot to stay in the first page or two. Other types of sites don't have that advantage.Side note: You may even be unconsciously censoring yourself in fear of losing karma. It's a similar effect to suddenly having a lot of followers on Twitter.
Of course, HN distorts this somewhat by just having one score for all the possible reasons a user might have to vote on a comment, and inevitably superstar posters get upvoted reflexively often drowning out better comments. But overall, as both a tool for measuring quality and a reward system it works pretty well.
By voting, we give each other points of a credibility currency that transcends individual discussions.
Just by talking to me, you've let me know what I said was worth at least a reply.
This is just opinion, so take it for what its worth... I'd much rather someone reply to me, email, chat whatever, and let me know what exactly they think rather than assign my words a value via a mouse click. Wouldn't you?
Yes, but I also upvoted you ;)
I essentially agree with you, it's just that I think karma has its place, too. And usually when I reply to a comment, I make it a point to give it a vote as well.
It would be interesting to see if hiding usernames for 24 hours has any effect on voting.
I've thought about this, actually, and based on my comment/karma history, it appears that I'm too dumb to keep from blurting out things people downvote.
I'm free of the tyranny of the hivemind by virtue of ignorance and stupidity!
I consciously say things I wouldn't otherwise because I know I have karma to burn. It's when you have < 100 karma you have to watch out otherwise you could end up in negative territory quickly and your posts be dead by default (the idea of voting people down for disagreement rather than stupidity is still going strong, it seems).
Show how many people / what percentage have 500 karma (which presumably is what it takes to downvote.)
Show how much karma a person would currently need to be at the 25th, 50th, 66th, 75th, 90th, 95th, and 99th percentiles (or whatever percentiles make sense).
Percentile for 500 karma: 73%
Rough karma thresholds for percentiles:
25% 12
50% 110
66% 333
75% 575
90% 1760
95% 3100
99% 9700
michaelapproved is not a valid username when searching but MichaelApproved is. Does HN allow for different case usernames or is it something that was overlooked during development of the search feature?
The code can be downloaded from http://ycombinator.com/arc/arc3.tar Note the code is from 2009 and didn't exactly match the running HN code at the time, so any conclusions from the published code aren't guaranteed. I did an analysis of the HN ranking formula back in 2009 - http://www.righto.com/2009/06/how-does-newsyc-ranking-work.h... - but the live formula is surely very different from the published code by now. And ironically, that article got about 0 upvotes so it didn't rank well :-)
pg (129961)
As of: Mon Feb 04 2013 07:34:16 GMT+0200 (IST)
Among all active users
Total users: 13431
Total users with less karma: 13430
Your rank: 1st
Overall karma percentile: 100.00%
Average karma increase per day: 56.260
Total users with slower increasing karma: 13427
Your speed rank: 4th
Speed percentile: 99.98%
Among active users from your registration month (October 2006)
Total users: 9
Total users with less karma than you: 8
Your rank: 1st
Percentile: 100.00%I can also think of some useful analyses if user votes were public. It might also help control gaming by surfacing voting rings and so on.
Submission scores are still public, so all you'd have to do is subtract submission karma from total karma.
That is, just post your thoughts on a topic, written as best you can. At least, that's worked well for me and probably most other high percentile-ers. Don't start pandering to what you think will attract a lot of upvotes- karma is meaningless after all.
Commenting at the right time seems to help.
Having a single thought per post also helps; people tend to upvote if they agree with the entire post.
Is there any way of fitting some kind of averaging in there? There is karma per day, so perhaps posts per day?
Also, (http://hn-karma-tracker.herokuapp.com/superstars)
98 and 99 appear to be duplicates.
I'd think that if it retains data from 25th within a few months it would be able to show a very good estimate of total active users
Would be even cooler if I could get stats of my most popular threads and comments. It would be also interesting to see pg's most popular thread and comment.
But it would be nice if all these "small" (not criticizing in any way here) websites allowed either query parameters in the URL or directly "short URLs" (like bit.ly etc.) so we could share links.
(maybe I missed it?)
It's not quite as useful, but a quick look at network activity shows the data gets pulled from /user/[name].json, like:
http://hn-karma-tracker.herokuapp.com/user/martinced.json
/user/[name] without the .json hits an error, unfortunately.