A Final Solution to the Wiki Question

[wagglyplacebo]

probably because it's funny. I see value to having things highlighted just because they're informative but if someone's reading the site you also probably want funny posts there.

Maybe there could be a toggle option? Have it automatically on but allow people to turn off the gold bar on posts if they find it distracting. Not now cause of testing but when its fully developed.

 

[Null]

I get that but I thought this was all related to replacing the wiki or whatever. oh well.

Not replacing, no. I still want to do the wiki. This is just noticeably more important to people.

Maybe there could be a toggle option? Have it automatically on but allow people to turn off the gold bar on posts if they find it distracting. Not now cause of testing but when its fully developed.

The trim will be less noticeable soon.

 

[ComedyEnjoyer]

Maybe you could just get back to work and make some more person streams you lazy fucking mutt.

 

[Fluke]

You already see it in A&H where even well written responses with cited sources get trashed if it goes against the narrative and circlejerk posts get a mountain of love.

Thats everyboard tough and its kind of an issue with these kinds of sites they all get cliquish. But atleast the clics change overtime depending of the perception of the person in question.

 

[Polyboros2]

I support this initiative, and second the call to weight the informative rating.

There are a lot of cows I don't look into because their thread is expansive, and their will be pages upon pages of shit posting/inside baseball that I don't get as an outsider to their lunacy. I've often longed for the ability to informative filter for a thread.

I think it would be super helpful for a thread like anything associated with active shooters, weeb wars, Trump Derangement syndrome, or say Zoe Quinn, which can all go for periods of less interesting content, with flares of wider interest. And with out suppressing the discussion of those really interested in it.

Edit to not double post: I don't like the idea of it being the best post in n pages, they're can often be bursts of great info sparced between waves of shit posting/speculations.

I don't like the idea of three posters in a page with good info and only one gets the gold border, and the next one is three pages over that just says "kill all troons"

 

[Null]

Would they be hand curated or automated?

Meaning, it the gold border automatic after so many likes, or does a mod review it before gold-bordering It?

Before you make this thread yet another one on one conversation with yourself, perhaps read the post you're replying to.

>As a stage one for this extension, I'm running an automated process every hour to look through active threads and start paginating it into best ofs.

The details regarding criteria are in the remainder of the post.

 

[melty]

I think this is a great idea and hope it works out.

One thought I've had for awhile is that it would be nice if there was some way to see only posts with media (images, videos). Since the farms discourages reaction image posts, in some threads this would naturally filter to mainly content posts about the cow since we're trained to take screencaps and backup videos.
This wouldn't work in a lot of cases but it would be really helpful in some threads.

 

[bbfx]

I support this initiative, and second the call to weight the informative rating.

I don't like the idea of it being the best post in n pages, they're can often be bursts of great info sparced between waves of shit posting/speculations.

I agree with these.

I'd also like having the option to skip from a "gold" message to the other, instead of having the "only best messages" view of the thread.

 

[Sam Losco]

So glad this post got highlighted:

https://kiwifarms.st/threads/virgin...lee-statue-from-us-capitol.64954/post-5818112

I can see a benefit to this, but it's current implementation based off ratings doesn't work. It's going to have to be a manual toggle by trusted people. Otherwise, it will be gamed.

 

[ScrappyLobsterchu]

I like the idea of being able to jump to important update posts from the OP. I guess it could turn into a circlejerk if users decide what posts are important but im sure if there is some oversight those posts could be weeded out.

I feel like as a part of wiki-izing the OPs some of them should be reformated or re written for easier reading, especially seeing as many of them are several years old and aren't really in line with current events or outlook on the cow Like the boogie thread's OP for example.

 

[registered 2 hide avatars]

Adding a "jump to the next good post" or generating "best of" thread compilation are both good ideas, especially the former. However I really dislike this reddit-tier gold border shit. There shouldn't be any cosmetic difference between regular and "good" posts, the content of the post itself should be what matters. This is also why ratings are absolute garbage, but at least you can hide those with the adblocker (maybe there's even an option for it in the settings but I haven't looked). You can't hide this border as far as I can tell. So if you're going forward with this terrible idea of highlighting popular posts, please allow us to hide the highlight, whether via an option in the forums or by making it a separate element so we can adblock it. Thank you

 

[Twinkie]

So glad this post got highlighted:

https://kiwifarms.st/threads/virgin...lee-statue-from-us-capitol.64954/post-5818112

View attachment 1084248

I can see a benefit to this, but it's current implementation based off ratings doesn't work. It's going to have to be a manual toggle by trusted people. Otherwise, it will be gamed.

When you say manual toggle by trusted people are you suggesting staff would have to go over the automated gilded posts and decide which are deserving? Because that doesn't sound realistic at all. Or am I misreading that?

 

[Null]

It's going to have to be a manual toggle by trusted people.

I'm simply not doing that. I am not going to get people to curate 6 years of shit. If you read my prior post, I'm excluding off-topic as a whole because it operates under different logic.

 

[edboy]

Does this mean users will be given Reddit Gold for info that is stolen off of a different website?

 

[Sam Losco]

When you say manual toggle by trusted people are you suggesting staff would have to go over the automated gilded posts and decide which are deserving? Because that doesn't sound realistic at all. Or am I misreading that?

No, I'm saying don't do an automated system because it will be gamed. Staff toggle it, but they don't have to go back through 6 years of content unless they want too. Most of the important threads will probably have some staff that do want to go back and highlight shit. Just have it be something that starts now. I get the want to highlight past shit, but it's not realisitic without an automated system but an auto system will get gamed and will highlight shit that shouldn't be.

I'm simply not doing that. I am not going to get people to curate 6 years of shit. If you read my prior post, I'm excluding off-topic as a whole because it operates under different logic.

Shit posts will still get highlighted in regular sections too. You might as well exclude Weeb Wars too if it's being based of positive reaction score. There will be tons of posts just bitching or trashing the kick vic side that will have overwhelmingly positive scores.




Actually, fuck it. I don't care. I'm just in a shitty, argumentative mood because I didn't get a job that I really wanted that would have vastly improved my life. I'm gonna fuck off for a while.

 

[Null]

Shit posts will still get highlighted in regular sections too.

Then that's what people get for dedicating their sperg tokens to shit posts I guess. I don't mind some funny shit posts in the reel but all I can do in response is tweak the algorithm to get a better overview of the thread.

 

[JoyfulDarter]

I've wanted something like this for awhile so thank you for putting in the time to do this, when the system is up and running optimally I really look forward to browsing some of the huge threads on cows I've missed.

I don't mind some funny shit posts in the reel but all I can do in response is tweak the algorithm to get a better overview of the thread.

Would it be possible for users to highlight posts by the type of rating in the future? Like if you just want to see dunks you'd sort by Winner. If you want to see a cow being a retard in their own thread you'd sort by Autism/Dumb. And if you want actual succinct content rather than 3 paragraph long armchair psychology analysis/dunks you'd sort by Informative.

 

[Smug Cat]

I like the idea, but I also agree current implementation isn't working.

Are there any concerns about rate-brigading? I know this is a big issue on reddit, and we definitely have enough mangry troons hyperfocused on us to organize rate-brigades for whatever posts they want to be most visible in whatever thread. They don't do it now because rates don't really mean anything, but anything those types can do, no matter how autistic, to control the narrative is something they will do.

There could potentially be restrictions on who could effectively upgold shit (T&H status, time registered, blah blah), but that risks creating the kind of autistic power-user class that smears diarrhea all over plebbit. Giving weight to informative ratings over others would be an improvement, I think, but it doesn't mitigate brigade risk at all. And it would probably modify the way people send out informative ratings in potentially sped ways.

Forgive me if this has already been suggested, but what about allowing mods to toggle special improved GoodInfoPost status, but relying on users to report the correct posts in each thread for highlight? That way you're crowdsourcing the finding of the important posts in each thread, which is the majority of the work, and all mods have to do is go "yeh" or "nah" instead of having some kind of insane assigned task of digging through 786-post threads for the informative bits.

 

[byuu]

I'm simply not doing that. I am not going to get people to curate 6 years of shit. If you read my prior post, I'm excluding off-topic as a whole because it operates under different logic.

How about marking all the old posts using ratings automatically but new posts have to be marked manually by a trusted person?

 

[JoyfulDarter]

Forgive me if this has already been suggested, but what about allowing mods to toggle special improved GoodInfoPost status, but relying on users to report the correct posts in each thread for highlight? That way you're crowdsourcing the finding of the important posts in each thread, which is the majority of the work, and all mods have to do is go "yeh" or "nah" instead of having some kind of insane assigned task of digging through 786-post threads for the informative bits.

One idea I had was essentially letting mods trigger Good Info status manually for posters per-thread. Basically if a particular individual has a reputation in a thread for being dedicated to mining info on a cow and generally offers up good posts the status gives them some kind of priority in the algorithm. But it's a per-thread basis, it doesn't give the user any special status or powers outside of that specific thread. It doesn't require mods to go through hundreds of thousands of posts to manually approve/disapprove, it's just a toggle they can implement on posters within a thread.

But I'm not a coder and don't know anything about the forum software so all my suggestions are probably either not feasible or too much of a pain in the ass to really bother with.