Psto good

Introduction

Recently, in the comments on Habré (especially in the comments to TechMedia posts ), opinions on the injustice of the existing system of karma began to be expressed with particular insistence. Among the frankly delusional arguments (about secret elite societies of minusators, about the inadmissibility of censorship in any form, etc.) there was one that I thought about.



Its essence was that the behavior of users allegedly (hereinafter, mentally add the word “supposedly” to all unclear statements) is asymmetrical in terms of putting pros and cons into karma. Pros are much easier to get for articles, and cons - for comments. Accordingly, this system is very painful for Read & Comment accounts. For a good comment with a rating of, say, +20, you can not get a single plus in karma. For a good comment on an ambiguous topic, you can get one or two minuses in karma, while the rating of the comment itself will again be +20. But for the only unsuccessful comment, you can very easily become otkhabrenny.

In this regard, you can ask three questions:

1. Is this true?
2. Is it fair?
3. If this is true, but unfair, what can be done about it?

The answer to the first question requires statistics, which is problematic to extract. Under the minus the karma is not signed anywhere, for what exactly it is exposed, and even more so - it is exposed according to merit or in a fit of momentary anger.

With the second question, too, everything is not easy. Perhaps this asymmetry is exactly what is needed to encourage the creation of articles. On the other hand, comments on Habré are often more interesting and useful than articles.

But on the third point, I have an idea. Let's arrange an attraction of unprecedented generosity!

The essence

In the absence of an automated solution, I propose to overcome injustice manually. Let everyone who believes that his karma is disproportionately and unmotivatedly corrupted, will be noted in the comments to this post. It will be good if such a person himself indicates in his comments what, in his opinion, was the reason for this damage. And also your current amount of karma and votes for it, so that later you can see how much they have changed. Let's say, in this form: [карма -3 / голосов 5]- so that later, if desired, it can be automatically parsed and summarized. The presence of such a code will also distinguish the comment of a person who is eager to restore justice in relation to himself, from the comment of someone who just went to chat.

Then anyone (first of all, I, as the initiator of this outrage) will be able to carefully and impartially evaluate a candidate, weigh, so to speak, his heart on the scales of Anubis. View (albeit, perhaps, fluently) the entire history of his stay on Habré and finally decide whether you need more such users here or vice versa, less. And according to this decision, put the mark in karma.

I urge not to put a plus or a minus for the fact of the mark here. In particular, I ask you to refrain from reflex cons for "pocketing." However, I cannot guarantee that my call will be heard. So write at your own risk.

What i want to achieve

Well, first of all, I really believe that there may be victims of the system on Habré, who collapsed several drawbacks from inadequacies, complained about it and received even minuses for “pockets”. And it would be great to cause them some good.

Secondly, it is interesting to me to collect personal statistics. Among the users sitting in the minuses, how much personally will seem to me adequate and not deserving it, and how much - quite the opposite.

And thirdly, I am interested in the reaction of Habr as a whole. Faced with a situation where it is proposed to rate not impulsively, but as a result of thoughtful consideration, will the community change its verdict?

Well, I also wonder how many minuses to karma I’ll personally do for this floodwater post =) And now - let's go. The game has begun.