The mixing of the "quality" axis with an "agree/disagree" axis risks coarsening discussion.
I think in practice there are only three useful situations:
- you post a good comment, and I agree
- you post a good comment, but I disagree
- you post a bad comment
I think we all want a scheme where I can reward you in the first two situations and punish you in the last one. Unfortunately what we seem to be getting is one that encourages rewards in the first and punishment in the second and third.
Here are my suggestions:
For comments, an upvote or downvote without a followup comment should only add or remove some fraction of a point in order to diminish the effect of people who silently agree or disagree. If you really want your disagreement to count significantly you'll have to comment and also take the risk that people will downvote (or upvote) you.
For posts, remove the upvote arrow from the main list until after someone has clicked on the link. People should have to at least read the thing they are upvoting.
Finally, make it possible for me to change my mind within a short interval of upvoting or downvoting.
I can agree with a comment and not want to karma-reward it, if it's mundane or repetitive. That might even go so far as to agree with the sentiment but find the comment of punishable quality, a sort of "OK but enough already".
The idea of weighing ratings from commenters in the same thread more highly is interesting.
Discouraging votes-without-reading and allowing quick corrections, as with comment text, both make sense to me too.
I think in practice there are only three useful situations:
- you post a good comment, and I agree
- you post a good comment, but I disagree
- you post a bad comment
I think we all want a scheme where I can reward you in the first two situations and punish you in the last one. Unfortunately what we seem to be getting is one that encourages rewards in the first and punishment in the second and third.
Here are my suggestions:
For comments, an upvote or downvote without a followup comment should only add or remove some fraction of a point in order to diminish the effect of people who silently agree or disagree. If you really want your disagreement to count significantly you'll have to comment and also take the risk that people will downvote (or upvote) you.
For posts, remove the upvote arrow from the main list until after someone has clicked on the link. People should have to at least read the thing they are upvoting.
Finally, make it possible for me to change my mind within a short interval of upvoting or downvoting.