Timeline for answer to Voting history statistics request by Shog9
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Post Revisions
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 2, 2023 at 15:04 | history | edited | Michael come lately | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Tables! (the musical). Also some HTML entities.
|
| Jan 18, 2021 at 12:13 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://data.stackexchange.com/ with https://data.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Jul 31, 2015 at 22:41 | comment | added | Deduplicator | Had not read the second one before. And I think the at most 2/3 downvotes rule was abolished long ago... Thanks. | |
| Jul 31, 2015 at 22:10 | comment | added | Shog9 StaffMod | If you've never read them, these two blog posts should give you a good understanding of the rationale here, @Deduplicator. | |
| Jul 31, 2015 at 21:45 | comment | added | Deduplicator | Yes, I get that. Which means there's a bias to upvoting, as there's no deterrent for that. Which might not be so bad, I would have less rep otherwise ;-). The interesting questions are 1. how good the 20K+ and unregistered voting-patterns align (which needs detail, and is probably quite hard to measure with any accuracy due to limited voting-populations), 2. whether the decrease in downvote-amount is actually counterbalanced by a corresponding increase in accuracy if there's a difference, and 3. whether downvoting-signal by members would digrade much if downvotes were free on answers. | |
| Jul 31, 2015 at 21:33 | comment | added | Shog9 StaffMod | The assumption is that if folks are reluctant to use them, they'll only use them when they feel strongly, @Deduplicator. But again, there's no way to guarantee that. | |
| Jul 31, 2015 at 21:31 | comment | added | Deduplicator | @Shog9: Well, the first is skewing the ratio between up/down. The latter is just degrading the signal in either class. Both are bad, if one wants the best possible evaluation of a posts worth, imperfect as it invariably is. | |
| Jul 31, 2015 at 21:28 | comment | added | Shog9 StaffMod | You don't consider those skew, @Deduplicator? I mean, it's not like folks don't upvote frivolously... | |
| Jul 31, 2015 at 21:22 | comment | added | Deduplicator | The reason for making them cost rep was skewing feedback? I thought it was more along the lines of ensuring they are used responsibly, instead of for fighting the competition, griefing (especially over moderation actions) and other such unwelcome acts. Anyway, it's interesting that anonymous users downvote as much as high-rep-users, even without knowing whether those votes are roughly for the same reasons... | |
| Jul 31, 2015 at 21:21 | comment | added | Shog9 StaffMod | Sussing out the actual reason for downvotes is another interesting exercise, @NormalHuman. One might make a bit of hay by identifying votes cast on posts a significant amount of time after they were posted. | |
| Jul 31, 2015 at 21:19 | comment | added | user3717023 | I suspect most of the negative anonymous feedback means "frustratingly, this post is not what I was looking for". This isn't a common reason for actual downvotes. | |
| Jul 31, 2015 at 21:18 | comment | added | durron597 | FWIW I have had to tell people many times that downvoting questions doesn't cost rep. A lot of people don't realize it and never downvote to even find out. | |
| Jul 31, 2015 at 21:12 | comment | added | Shog9 StaffMod | Breaking this down by votes on questions (which don't cost rep for registered downvoters) and answers (which do) is left as an exercise for the reader... | |
| Jul 31, 2015 at 21:06 | history | answered | Shog9StaffMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |