View Single Post
benny1967's Avatar
Posts: 3,790 | Thanked: 5,718 times | Joined on Mar 2006 @ Vienna, Austria
#178
Originally Posted by Texrat View Post
It really hit home that an outspoken malcontent can earn posting Thanks from other malcontents and ultimately gain enough to seem credible as a contributor. Ironically this works against the system.

I'm not suggesting any sort of karmic censorship but it does point out, again, that human judgment HAS to be the most important element. There may actually be some way to implement automated checks-and-balances to minimize "malcontent validation" but ultimately people need to apply some sense to the processing.
Is karma for malcontent an actual problem? In terms of OrangeBox getting 500+ karma points or such? Or is it a theoretical thing?

I mean, thanking already is the human judgment you're talking about. What you introduce now is meta-judgment. We'd need to double-check that, too. Right?

I'm very much in favor of automated Karma counts, little human interaction. (Except where the karma actually expresses thankfulness.)
Having it based on human judgment too much will open the door to all errors humans can make... including: We might overlook the silent ones and give all karma we can give to those who're always in the limelight. Those who have a working social network here may get more karma than those who do things but don't chat and make friends. Etc.
Humans are.... I don't know. I like computers.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to benny1967 For This Useful Post: