24 may be too much for a downvoting decision. I think more than 3 because it adds more voices to the decision and leaves less room for gaming the outcome. Random selection and anonymous jurors would do much, but if I'm adjudicating your downvote of @prydefoltz and like her more than I like you, I may decide it's more important to vote with my affinity for prydefoltz rather than on the side of justice. If one other juror did that and there are only three, the majority is on the side of injustice. The more jurors you have, the less likely such thinking will rule the adjudication process.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
@blockurator,
Well, we both know that if I was downvoting @prydefoltz, she would bloody well deserve it, wouldn't she? Block ... she wrote a poem about Brussels Sprouts!!!
OK, I just made that up. But now that I've planted the seed ... you just wait and see ... an "Ode to B.S." (No smart remarks about the odds-on-favorite to actually write a poem so entitled.)
Recall that the usernames of both the Poster and the Downvoter would be erased so as to increase impartiality. Such precaution is not, of course, foolproof. I sign off all my posts with, "Quill." Moreover, each of my posts ends with a Power House Creatives logo so even if a Juror wasn't biased in favor of me personally, he/she might be biased in favor of my group.
Don't let the perfect become the enemy of the good. We will always have to accept something less than perfection. Hopefully, such hypothetical Juror bias would be offset by the impartiality of the other Jurors. Respecting the number of Jurors, I'd be more than happy to leave that to the collective judgement of the community ... whatever everyone decides.
Here's my thought: Once such a system is in place, it won't get used much.
Instantly, all the blatantly abusive Posters AND Downvoters will realize the jig is up. If they engage in shenanigans, they'll get called on it and attempting to intimidate their way to immunity, via retaliatory downvoting, will be self-harming ... by doubling the downvote or bouncing it back to themselves, as the case may be.
95% is, by definition, imperfect ... but it still gets you into Harvard.
Quill
You overestimate the goodness of man. But I missed the anonymization of the poster and downvoter. My apologies.
Okay, so I may have to be the first to write the Ode to B.S. In your honor.
:-)