What PieFed's "social credit system" actually does
-
I think the attitude system is insane when the fediverse is filled with so many people who deserve every downvote they get.
I mean it’s all relative right? Sure we all get downvoted sometimes but if you’re getting downvoted way more than the average person you might be doing something the community doesn’t want you to.
-
I think the attitude system is insane when the fediverse is filled with so many people who deserve every downvote they get.
The attitude system is about the downvotes somebody gives, not the ones they receive.
And I think it’s a good thing. If downvoting is disincentivized, then downvotes themselves are more significant.
-
Just like Reddit, PieFed keeps track of how many upvotes and downvotes your posts receive and the net value of all the votes received is called your “reputation” (Reddit calls it “karma”). This is not shown in the UI anywhere (except to administrators), to dissuade the karma-farming behavior common on Reddit. Reputation is not a game or status symbol, it is a mechanic for enhancing trust and safety on PieFed.
Some people have criticized PieFed for this, calling it a “social credit system” similar to the one in China so I thought it’d be good to explain exactly what it does so people don’t need to guess or rely on hearsay.
I always thought the two red triangles were a UX bug. Looks weird.
-
I mean it’s all relative right? Sure we all get downvoted sometimes but if you’re getting downvoted way more than the average person you might be doing something the community doesn’t want you to.
The attitude system is how many times you downvote other people.
-
The attitude system is about the downvotes somebody gives, not the ones they receive.
And I think it’s a good thing. If downvoting is disincentivized, then downvotes themselves are more significant.
I… Know. I read the post. And thatsl’s what I’m saying.
-
I… Know. I read the post. And thatsl’s what I’m saying.
Guess I’m confused about why you brought up the Attitude rating then.
A profile’s attitude (votes given ) has no correlation to a “low reputation” status (votes received ).
-
Guess I’m confused about why you brought up the Attitude rating then.
A profile’s attitude (votes given ) has no correlation to a “low reputation” status (votes received ).
Saying people have a bad attitude because other people suck is rude.
-
Saying people have a bad attitude because other people suck is rude.
Attitude only affects people who only downvote. Let’s say there’s a community with 100 people. 99 of them participate in good faith and make good content and the final one participates in bad faith and makes bad content. One day, all of them make a post and vote on everybody else’s posts.
The result: 99 good faith community members have posts with score of 98 and an Attitude of ~98%. 1 bad faith community member has a post with a score of -98 and an Attitude of -100% (or 0% because I forget how this works exactly)
-
The attitude system is how many times you downvote other people.
Oh thanks I felt like I was missing something.
-
Oh thanks I felt like I was missing something.
The reputation is the hidden score that if you’re below whatever threshold it displays the red triangle(s) by your name.
-
I always thought the two red triangles were a UX bug. Looks weird.
If you move you mouse over, or finger, you can obtain the reason
-
I think it might be fine? I like systems that reinforce trust and dissuade bad behavior as long as they aren’t draconian.
We use it that way, we want to disuade bad behaviour. As it is explained, there is very few users that reach veny low score.
-
I think the attitude system is insane when the fediverse is filled with so many people who deserve every downvote they get.
On the flip side, the fediverse tends to have a pretty strong monoculture. You can collect down votes just by disagreeing with someone respectfully or stating your view point here.
Maybe it it’s numbers grow, it will become a bit less of an echo chamber.
-
I think the attitude system is insane when the fediverse is filled with so many people who deserve every downvote they get.
Yes although if you’re only here to downvote bad content then perhaps your focus is in the wrong place.
-
Yes although if you’re only here to downvote bad content then perhaps your focus is in the wrong place.
Not naming any names coughfrongtcough
-
Yes although if you’re only here to downvote bad content then perhaps your focus is in the wrong place.
I introduced some friends to piefed, and told them about the attitude system. They said they only downvote because remembering to upvote is too hard for their ADHD. So they said on piefed, they just won’t vote.
-
If you move you mouse over, or finger, you can obtain the reason
They mean the fact there’s two instead of one
-
I introduced some friends to piefed, and told them about the attitude system. They said they only downvote because remembering to upvote is too hard for their ADHD. So they said on piefed, they just won’t vote.
Yeah if someone can’t tell the difference it’s probably better if they don’t vote?
-
Yeah if someone can’t tell the difference it’s probably better if they don’t vote?
They can tell the difference. What they’re saying is, good posts don’t elicit a strong enough emotional reaction to get them to upvote. It’s not part of their workflow.
-
On the flip side, the fediverse tends to have a pretty strong monoculture. You can collect down votes just by disagreeing with someone respectfully or stating your view point here.
Maybe it it’s numbers grow, it will become a bit less of an echo chamber.
I found that out the fun way by having the unpopular opinion of “we shouldn’t encourage 4chan-style doxxing threats over server drama”. The admin of lemmy.zip banned me from the server, presumably because it was somebody from that server pushing for that behavior.
