[minimaxir]

Notable functional promise to reduce prevailence of clickbait/fake news:

> Fortunately, there are clear steps we can take to correct these effects. For example, we noticed some people share stories based on sensational headlines without ever reading the story. In general, if you become less likely to share a story after reading it, that's a good sign the headline was sensational. If you're more likely to share a story after reading it, that's often a sign of good in-depth content. We recently started reducing sensationalism in News Feed by taking this into account for pieces of content, and going forward signals like this will identify sensational publishers as well.

[astrodust]

Same thing should hold true for blind upvotes on social sites like this.

[anigbrowl]

That fails if you do a first-order implementation because you have no way of knowing whether the person voting/sharing had already read the article, but not necessarily shared it at the time of reading. As a simple example, I subscribe to The Economist and prefer reading the paper version. If I see a story from there cited by someone else, I don't need to read it again to recommend it.

Also, depending on the content and source it may be possible to infer the value or significance of something from the headline alone, eg when one has specialist domain knowledge and sees a headline one knows to be an accurate summary of recent developments in that field.

[privong]

> That fails if you do a first-order implementation because you have no way of knowing whether the person voting/sharing had already read the article, but not necessarily shared it at the time of reading.

It might still hold for a large group of people, though, and be valid in a statistical sense? Which is what they're really after.

[anigbrowl]

It could definitely help as long as it's appropriately weighted rather than being a binary choice. It'll be interesting to see how it pans out.

[minimaxir]

Reddit recently introduced outbound link tracking which grants them the same data necessary to do that, although the intent is more for monetization.

On HN, the idea was floated around but quickly shot down: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12053645

[grzm]

Interesting. Do you have references re: HN?

[minimaxir]

Edited in link

[grzm]

Thanks!

[monk_e_boy]

I wonder how it'd work if people with high karma (or HN score whatever it's called) had more than one upvote.

So people that the community trust would have a larger say in what the community saw on the front page. Say for every 1K karma they get an extra 0.1 to their vote... I think mine would be about +1.3

I think the same could work in democracy but on a more fine scale. At the moment my local MP has more of a say in government than I do. Rightly so. But we could make those levels more interesting, if we said that if twenty people endorse you, your vote becomes twice as powerful. I bet someone has thought this through better than me.