←back to thread

615 points __rito__ | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.576s | source

Related from yesterday: Show HN: Gemini Pro 3 imagines the HN front page 10 years from now - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46205632
Show context
modeless ◴[] No.46222213[source]
This is a cool idea. I would install a Chrome extension that shows a score by every username on this site grading how well their expressed opinions match what subsequently happened in reality, or the accuracy of any specific predictions they've made. Some people's opinions are closer to reality than others and it's not always correlated with upvotes.

An extension of this would be to grade people on the accuracy of the comments they upvote, and use that to weight their upvotes more in ranking. I would love to read a version of HN where the only upvotes that matter are from people who agree with opinions that turn out to be correct. Of course, only HN could implement this since upvotes are private.

replies(7): >>46222748 #>>46223194 #>>46223649 #>>46224507 #>>46226548 #>>46228558 #>>46229291 #
cootsnuck ◴[] No.46222748[source]
The RES (Reddit Enhancement Suite) browser extension indirectly does this for me since it tracks the lifetime number of upvotes I give other users. So when I stumble upon a thread with a user with like +40 I know "This is someone whom I've repeatedly found to have good takes" (depending on the context).

It's subjective of course but at least it's transparently so.

I just think it's neat that it's kinda sorta a loose proxy for what you're talking about but done in arguably the simplest way possible.

replies(2): >>46223139 #>>46224287 #
nickff ◴[] No.46223139[source]
I am not a Redditor, but RES sounds like it would increase the ‘echo-chamber’ effect, rather than improving one’s understanding of contributors’ calibration.
replies(5): >>46223212 #>>46223419 #>>46223446 #>>46229052 #>>46229324 #
mistercheph ◴[] No.46223212[source]
it depends on if you vote based on the quality of contribution to the discussion or based on how much you agree/disagree.
replies(1): >>46229227 #
1. miki123211 ◴[] No.46229227[source]
I don't think you can change user behavior like this.

You can give them a "venting sink" though. Instead of having a downvote button that just downvotes, have it pop up a little menu asking for a downvote reason, with "spam" and "disagree" as options. You could then weigh downvotes by which option was selected, along with an algorithm to discover "user honesty" based on whether their downvotes correlate with others or just with the people on their end of the political spectrum, a la Birdwatch.

replies(1): >>46240758 #
2. morshu9001 ◴[] No.46240758[source]
You can't change it for other users, only for yourself, which is what the original comment about the extension said.