It's not that I hate this feature. It makes me a bit sad. I've been coming here almost everyday for just under 2 years. I'm not orange. And that makes me wonder if I really should be here? Am I, actually, one of those people that HN doesn't want?
Okay - this is exactly the problem that occurred to me within 2 seconds of learning how this feature works. If it's going to work any way, it should at least be a GRADIENT from grey to orange. This way of doing suddenly splits your whole user community into two groups, the Greys and the Oranges.
There's a huge difference in human psychology between a gradient and a divider. Not that this is necessarily a good idea anyway - it encourages people not to post on old threads, or even not to post too far off the top of the page, etc. But in any case - if you're going to do it at all, make it a gradient!
While I agree that this is divisive, having a gradient would just defeat the purpose of the feature, which is to highlight those whose examples you should be following.
Making it a gradient makes it really hard to tell who is setting a good example and who isn't.
Rather than a gradient, I'd just like the option to turn it off, even if that option is only available after 50 karma or something. To me it is visual noise.
Even better if it was visible to a user up to X karma and then disappeared past that. Then it would serve its training purpose without leading to a long-term two-tier culture here.
My first real thought when reading this thread was, "Hmm...strange that he's not orange" about a few different usernames I recognized.
I think I have to come down on the side of not liking the feature, but I'm not sure I'm right about my reasons for not liking it. I've always thought one of the great things about reddit and HN is that identity of the poster is understated. It's not anonymous, but it's possible to read comments without seeing the user who posted them. Every comment thus stands alone and is judged on its own merits. "Bad" users get a fresh start with every post, and "good" users have to say something interesting or not at all. Now, I have some sort of stamp of approval the moment I post.
Then again, most people are idiots, and if software can make it more apparent who the idiots are, maybe it'll make it easier to tolerate them when they start showing up here in larger numbers.
As a recent "idiot" (sarcasm) who has read HN for over a year now, and just signed up to participate, I have a thought. I chose to reply to this particular post of yours with my thought, because you're orange, so maybe I'll get noticed (also sarcasm), because, alas, I'm only gray, oh and also because it fits (loosely) in the context of your post.
Anyway, I have a suggestion for PG, not that he'll notice it this deep in the thread, but:
What if we could add certain users to a "favorites" list and then any posts they make would show up to us as orange. I've got certain favorite posters on here who I like to read and other people who I do not like to read. Some of my favorites are orange, but then again some are not. I know this may be hugely complex from a technical standpoint, but that's my big thought for the day.
Edit: On re-reading my post, I'm not trying to come across as an ass SwellJoe, I was just trying to be witty. I guess if I have to clarify that, it didn't work :-)
Never attribute to malice what can be explained by a version 1. Basically, you've been hosed by the time-zone problem froo mentioned (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=466967). I need to figure out some way to normalize.
If you're trying to normalise by the number of potential upvoters then a crude method would be: upvotes/(total thread views - thread views at time of posting)
Doesn't factor in a bunch of things, but it does also cover posts on unpopular threads as well as bad times.
i was just having a similar thought: won't this "flaunting" of karma create more social unrest (defensiveness, ego-grabbing, immature or strategic conversations)?
when i first came here i loved seeing my karma grow. it gave me a feeling of acceptance that reddit's meanness never could. (i found the content more interesting, too, and of course hope that i'm part of that, just as you do.)
i say karma should stay private. it is useful for personal gratification. the path to good discussion is humility and insight.
It's not flaunting of karma - it serves a usability purpose.
If you want to skim for good comments, this feature helps you do so. This feature helps to highlight comments with few points that might be of merit, because the poster tends to say good things.
I'd advise that if not being orange hurts a person's feelings, that reflects on the person's state of mind more than anything.
Bottom line - if the orange color helps me find better comments, faster - it' a good feature.
Suppose someone tends to make insightful, useful and interesting comments, the sort you want to find when quickly skimming. Suppose that same person also makes lots of little comments to assist others in finding information, the sort of comments that don't get upmodded because they've taken time to compile and hence come late, the sort that are on niche matters that don't make it to the front page, etc.
This feature prevents you from seeing their comments.
As long as I take the time to research my answers, and as long as I take time to find and flag duplicate submissions, my name will never turn orange. That means that people like you who skim for the orange will never value my other submissions.
<fx: shrugs> Maybe my contributions are of no value.
exactly. good comments filter up, bad comments filter down. recent comments need to be evaluated (and responded to, which are then evaluated themselves) to get placed. the orange is an unnecessary distraction.
the previous commenter makes a good point about mental state. I was pointing out the same effect. if everyone here was mature and not-defensive and self-confident, then we probably wouldn't have so much trouble with moderating discussions. most people here will skip over the orange fine, but i believe it may exacerbate karma trolling and feelings of ill-will.
Well, I'm not orange either, FWIW. So don't worry about it.
I do think though that this is basically going to result in the "orangemen" being upvoted into the stratosphere simply for being that colour, regardless of what they say. I don't think an overt display of what is essentially "I'm pg and I approve this message" is really the right way to go, but I applaud his effort.
Yeah I have been coming and participating in this community for a very long time, but I am just not that incredibly active. I don't post many stories, and I don't comment very often.
It is funny how many times the HN community it trying to protect themselves from 'noobs', I feel like they push the more casual users a bit further away.
There's a major difference between n00b and casual user. The n00b doesn't try to integrate, they don't try to absorb the culture. They simply act like puppies, get very excited and pee all over the place.
The intention is to help n00bs become casual users, and some casual users to become respected members. You are definitely more of a casual user approaching welcome member.
I've been here less time than you - these are simply my opinions.
I'm orange because I posted a 50 point comment the other day. pg replied to it saying my comment violated the site guidelines (which it did) and calling it superficial (which was an unfair insult). So, that's how my name got pretty. Now does life seem fair? ;-)
I have mixed feelings about the orange highlighting.
Yes, I think it will help improve the quality and perhaps brevity of comments, and I think it sets up a visual caste system.
Writing and getting comments upmodded make me feel a little better - a little recognition but reading comments (or listening to them via TextAloud) is why I read News.YC.
I comment frequently but sometimes sporadically, and I comment to try to add value to a discussion (e.g. point out something I've read before) or sometimes for the heck of it. I think it's good to express opinions.
I remember at one point making it onto the top 100 'Leaders' in News.YC and it felt great. I felt like I was competing with swombat for the bottom 5 spots. I think this was around when swombat had 1300 or so karma. He now has 4924! Amazing. Consistency. It is nice to be recognized but it is fine with me to just be a small fractional part of this community, and it is hard to be consistently be a quality contributor (like swombat and others).
I fired up a Google spreadsheet to see why I wasn't orange (3.04 with highest thrown out vs 3.64 included).
Perhaps median would be interesting to look at, or 90th percentile?
With average, witty, or emotionally-moving one-liners will gain a disproportional impact as they are easiest to upvote, and as such, these items tend to be runaway karma-catchers.
When you say you've learned your lesson, do you mean you'll upvote thought-provoking, longer comments in the future? If so, I wish you good luck, but I'm skeptical about your potential success.
I've had my news.yc account for almost 2 years now, and it has always worked this way. Pithy 1-liners get upvotes; longer thoughtful comments often languish.
We're all in a hurry, so we're more likely to read shorter comments. The longer a comment is, and the more it makes us think, the less likely we are to expend the effort. The most valuable comments are ones that can change our thinking, and by nature such comments will seem wrong or unimportant when we look at them with our current thinking. The problem is human, not technological.
It's easier for me to change what I do than to change what others do, so I've adjusted my comment style to be shorter. Sometimes that means I pass up the chance to share deep thoughts. Other times it makes me more effective. For example, both ericb's and my comments made the same point, but mine drove it home better, didn't it? Upvote with a clear conscience. :-)
I've likewise been here a while, and it has had an effect on my commenting style too. (Albeit almost the opposite.) If I think of a witty one liner or a joke, I'll resist posting it (where before I would have gone for it), because I actually consider whether it'll just add noise.
I also try to be more concise with my comments. Often times I think I have a point to make, but after writing quite a bit I realize that I'm just reasoning in circles and have no ground to stand on. If I can't state my point briefly (and then add elaboration to support it), then maybe I don't have one.
It says something about a site whose culture can make me abandon a position because I realize it's unfounded as I try to articulate it.
As for the one-liners. I'd like to qualify that I'll still upvote them if they are truly insightful, but I'll think twice if they are merely witty. As you say, good comments teach us something new.
Not everyone that deserves to be made an example of gets the privilege, nor does everyone that deserves to be marginalized so treated. It doesn't imply you aren't in either group if you aren't singled out; it just means the stage isn't that large. :-)
The problem is that gauging worthiness of something is a very difficult, even -- or especially -- when human judges are involved. I think of this as a first stab at a very complicated problem; making sense of votes made for a variety of motivations, not all of them what this algorithm is trying to isolate and encourage. I suspect several iterations will follow.
Here I was, just days away from being able to down-mod people and they double the karma requirements.
Don't be silly pistoriusp, after being here for two years I'm not surprised your last 50 average comments karma is not 3.5 less than your last 25 average comments karma. Your definitely leveling off, which should be fine. Although there have been many more users lately, so perhaps there is karma inflation that should boost your average karma over time.
