[Sealy]

Karma to me is my score. How well I'm doing and how respected I am in the community. At the moment I'm (proudly) on 517.

If my contributions are valuable. I will get upvotes. If they are not, then I won't. Without gaming the system, I believe this was by design (PG also shared this in a few of his earlier posts).

In reality. I'm always sharing links with the community of things I find interesting. My experience is that rewards for sharing links (upvote karma) seems to be very random, with stories I think are genuinely fresh, conceptually challenging and interesting getting far fewer upvotes then stories which I consider to be relatively dull.

[rustynails]

This is a double edged sword, and most probably the thing I like least about HN. It strikes me as elitist and encourages a particular type of groupthink That I am uncomfortable with. As an example, conservative thinking is usually rewarded and less conventional thinking is usually overlooked. In some ways, I find HN to lack diversity in its culture and what it values (which is why I rarely contribute - I definitely put myself in the "on the fringe" category who will remain that way unless some diversity in thinking creeps in, or there's a radical change). This is interesting because I am a big contributor at other sites where I feel diverse thinking is more respected .. I am absolutely happy to accept this is my own bias, however, HN is a unique experience for me in that respect (except Slashdot that I gave up on for similar reasons). Personally, I don't pay any attention to these scores. I prefer less profile visibility, less badges, less karma and more weighting on an article or comment in isolation. If anything, maybe encourage certain knowledge domains, eg. Science or biology. The domains themselves are less important to me at this moment (except where they are political - and I include gender politics in that: it's stifling and off putting to me, despite its current popularity), but it may diversify what I see and view at HN. Ultimately, I don't get a lot of benefit from HN, but there are some (few) exceptional articles that I wouldn't otherwise see - which is why I visit HN. Diverse thinking is very important to me. I am more likely to attribute HN "rigging" to encouraged groupthink than being gamed. Other than categories and less egocentric measurement, I don't have suggestions that would improve things. I apologise if my post offends, I've felt these views since I first came to HN. It's not intended to insult, but it most probably will.

[Sealy]

Agreed, Reddit chose to take the route of having subreddits or as you said in your comment, Categorys. This absolutely makes sense in my mind as I can then browse the sub-specialisation of most interest to me personally.

Subcategorisation does not need to be user-driven like reddit though and I'd encourage the admins of Hacker News to control that themselves with the type of content posts they would most like to see us post around.

If they are open to suggestion, I'd at least consider categories such as: Startup Advice (like Ask HN), Innovative tech, Show HN (as its own category), VC

[nik61]

Downvote karma is also arbitrary. I've been on negative karma for some time following my negative comments about the HN-described behaviour of someone's beloved mentor - who forced his classes to buy his book. I think this was a bad behaviour on the teacher's part but 'others' took offence. I sometimes feel the that a self-appointed in-group or coterie is being a bit arbitrary and authoritarian in its conduct of these HN matters.