Timeline for Does the fact that comments aren't anonymous discourage people who downvote from explaining why?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 3, 2017 at 21:24 | comment | added | sempaiscuba | @Bregalad Fair point. :) However, I've been saying the same thing for a long time. I think the system leads to a range of undesirable behaviours (although I would hesitate to use it myself, I've seen the term "Rep Whores" used on other sites). As I say, I just try to give the "best" answer that I can to a given question, although the fact that I actually get paid to do historical research probably does give me something of an advantage in that regard. :) | |
| Dec 3, 2017 at 21:13 | comment | added | Bregalad |
because I don't feel especially motivated by reputation scores and badge says guy with 25k rep. Pretty much like tose extremely rich people who claims to not care all that much about money :)
|
|
| Nov 22, 2017 at 0:21 | comment | added | sempaiscuba | @LarsBosteen Yes, that could work. Provided that system was applied consistently. But like I say, I've not really given this question a lot of thought. | |
| Nov 21, 2017 at 22:38 | comment | added | Lars Bosteen | Could the problem of 'Be nice' violations swamping the moderators be solved by having the comment automatically deleted if, say, 5 people flag it? | |
| Nov 21, 2017 at 16:53 | comment | added | T.E.D. Mod | Yes, considering that answer related to Hitler and denialisim, I think its a reasonable assumption any silent downvote it gets is from a voter who, against all evidence to the contrary, in fact thinks Hitler apologists and denialists are dandy sources. | |
| Nov 21, 2017 at 16:11 | history | answered | sempaiscuba | CC BY-SA 3.0 |