[Forum] Reaction spam

[Tristan__]

@Remocracy just had a situation where his magical internet points vanished and went to -214 at the time of this post. Regardless if this is abuse (I argue it's not), we should find a solution to this so further magical internet point loss doesn't happen

Here are a few solutions that could solve this problem:

• limit accounts to only be able to react x times a day (credits to @Zephyrus)
• limit the reactions one user account can add to another user, e.g. x reactions in x time (credits to me)
• shadow yeet the magical internet points added or deducted by the reactions (and maybe even the reactions itself) if the user is detected to be spamming them (also important for upvote bots) (credits to me)

What should be done about post upvote and downvote spam could be solved with this too, but I think it should be handled differently

Reply with other solutions if you have one.

Spoiler: Solution shortcuts

Collection of your solutions:

• user weight for reactions (#2)
• to lower a score => lower your score at the same time (#4)
• Replace the counter with a face whose emotion changes depending on the proportion of negative to positive points one has. (#7)
• reaction score should not be public [...], removing the points altogether (#14)
• remove them, and maybe only show the score of specific comments. (#15)
• you can only give “magical internet points” after you yourself has been given the points (#20)
• "one account should be able to influence the reaction score of another account by at most one point" (#26)
• "wipe at the end of the month with top 10 and last 10 people shown. [...] MD could also integrate trophies in this system so said people will be awarded something." (#29)
• "'reaction score' could just be renamed to 'monthly reaction score'" (#32)
• "The points are a mistake. The scores shouldn't exist, all the reactions should give 0 points." (#34)
• "You need at least a few generic [rules]" (#45)
• "either completely remove the reaction/point system, or to remove all negative reactions" (#47)
• "reactions being kept on the posts themselves and not applied to the user" (#49)

 

[Tristan__]

A solution that I can think of is to have a system where you can only give “magical internet points” after you yourself has been given the points

so basically a magical internet points currency

 

[Tristan__]

I added shortcuts to #1 since solutions can get lost in the discussion.

 

[ixangel]

so basically a magical internet points currency

Except that you don’t get your own points removed when you give other people points, yes. Think of it as getting another pot of points that’s used exclusively to give to other people.

A certain forum calls the system “reputation” and “rep power”, with rep power being how much you’re able to give away to other people (either + or -)

 

[Richman]

I like how solutions 1 and 2 sound, could both be implemented probably.

I think that the currency system solution could feel very limiting, at least to me, I think you would react a lot more to others than get reacted to, you know what I mean? Of course, you could react more with others to gain reactions, but then there's a line between interacting in good faith and attention seeking.

 

[Trobilobada]

Doesn't matter what should or shouldn't happen, it's just human psychology. It's like saying someone shouldn't judge others based on appearance, or as a closer comparison, at first glance. Just because it's true doesn't mean that people don't do it. Even if you personally don't, it doesn't change the fact that it happens.

Your inner workings that you described earlier are your own biases, nothing more. Don't try to pass your stupid assumptions as mere "human psychology" and apply it to the entire population, it's not and comparing them to the first impression you can get from someone's appearance won't make it so either. Also, just because "it happens" doesn't mean you should dumbdown a system because of it. That's encouraging it and downward leveling.

Bandwagons, and other reasons is why Youtube removed removed the dislike feature. Is it because the dislike feature didn't affect people's perception? No, it's precisely because it does.
If you go on
https://blog.youtube/inside-youtube/letter-susan-our-2022-priorities/
They repeat what you said

As a reason to remove the dislikes, not to keep them.

They don't repeat what I said. I said, people "like and dislike", not just dislike. They're two sides of the same coin, and if you can't deal with both of them, you better toss that coin away.
The comparison doesn't even stand anyway. MD users don't make money through their forum popularity for example.

 

[htt]

limits over a period of time don't do anything to address the issue, it just pushes it down the road. you've now made it a hourly/daily/weekly/whatever task for the detractor to repeat.

imo one account should be able to influence the reaction score of another account by at most one point. formulaically, this would normalise all of account A's reactions to account B to within [-1, +1], and have that be account A's contribution to account B's reaction score.

if you're a proliferate but harmless poster, the most a hater can do is knock you down a point. if you're an asshat and piss off the community at large, your score will reflect that (i think)

 

[ixangel]

I like how solutions 1 and 2 sound, could both be implemented probably.

I think that the currency system solution could feel very limiting, at least to me, I think you would react a lot more to others than get reacted to, you know what I mean? Of course, you could react more with others to gain reactions, but then there's a line between interacting in good faith and attention seeking.

Then don’t give out “magical internet points” if you get points deducted. If your posts gets upvoted, you get to send out some points. If you get downvoted you won’t.

 

[bigtiddyoneesan]

a decent solution previously stated would be to remove global reaction score on profiles. this would get around the issue of someone spam-reacting to a user to tank their reaction score.

for the people who say that reaction score is imaginary internet points and don't matter: i mean yeah, you're right. but it does have some use in helping people determine general credibility and thoughtfulness of comments (or lack thereof).

there will always be issues when it comes to scoring comments of course. people choose their reactions depending on agree/disagree (and partially related, popular vs unpopular opinion), personal conflict, or just to troll. however, reactions of debatable legitimacy would definitely not be the norm, especially on this site.

as for solutions that do not involve removing visible global reaction score: as stated by other users, something would have to be done to prevent the minority of users who would abuse the system. it would take more time and effort than just removing global reaction score visibility, though; at least for the time being.

fortunately, since mangadex doesn't determine comment visibility by reaction score, it's already on the more 'fair' end of the comment system spectrum. that, in addition to the fact that reaction scores have only recently been introduced, allows the opportunity to remove global scores without shaking up the system to any serious degree.

 

[Grannix]

How about making reaction score more fun and entertaining?
If possible without deleting reactions themselves, reaction score wipe at the end of the month with top 10 and last 10 people shown. It will destroy the whole "reputation" thingie but will add reaction wars :mahiro:
Edit:
MD could also integrate trophies in this system so said people will be awarded something.
For example trophy for last place could be something like "in the santa's bad list"
Edit2:
Can also add category for post with most positive/negative/both reactions

 

[SpaceTurtle]

I think you are over-engineering a feature that was only meant to add a bit of fun to the forum.

The real problem isn't that people can spam points, it's that people are taking them too seriously, treating them like reddit karma or something similar.

The system is already generating some drama, and if you try to modify it so that it actually reflects a user's trustworthiness it could get much worse, so I insist you remove them. But if you want to keep it I would suggest you rename it to something that reflects its original intent (like “magical internet points” but shorter).

How about making reaction score more fun and entertaining?
If possible without deleting reactions themselves, reaction score wipe at the end of the month with top 10 and last 10 people shown. It will destroy the whole "reputation" thingie but will add reaction wars :mahiro:

this is good too

 

[Richman]

But if you want to keep it I would suggest you rename it to something that reflects its original intent (like “magical internet points” but shorter).

Mangos!

 

[bigtiddyoneesan]

How about making reaction score more fun and entertaining?
If possible without deleting reactions themselves, reaction score wipe at the end of the month with top 10 and last 10 people shown. It will destroy the whole "reputation" thingie but will add reaction wars :mahiro:
Edit:
MD could also integrate trophies in this system so said people will be awarded something.
For example trophy for last place could be something like "in a santa's bad list"

this is a good idea. 'reaction score' could just be renamed to 'monthly reaction score' so everyone would know at a glance that it's temporary.

 

[rikuwu]

I think you are over-engineering a feature that was only meant to add a bit of fun to the forum.

The real problem isn't that people can spam points, it's that people are taking them too seriously, treating them like reddit karma or something similar.

The system is already generating some drama, and if you try to modify it so that it actually reflects a user's trustworthiness it could get much worse, so I insist you remove them. But if you want to keep it I would suggest you rename it to something that reflects its original intent (like “magical internet points” but shorter).



this is good too

This.

 

[Teasday]

The points are a mistake. The scores shouldn't exist, all the reactions should give 0 points. There's no such thing as internet points that don't matter and acting like they're fine is misdirection at best, people will find a way to care about them and use them to create problems where none would otherwise exist.

Frankly the same should apply to visible post counts. Nothing good has ever come out of systems like these.

 

[BraveDude8]

My personal opinion is that we should just ban users from using reactions if they abuse them. No need to cripple the system for a few bad actors.

I would categorise going through someone's entire post history to react to them specifically as abuse, in the same way Reddit categorises mass upvoting/downvoting of a single user from their profile page as abuse.

 

[Asasa]

I agree with Teasday. I'd say remove the score system and maybe only keep the ^ reaction so people can say the equivalent of "I agree" through it without needing to post and without any incidence beyond the message in question.

 

[Remocracy]

limits over a period of time don't do anything to address the issue, it just pushes it down the road. you've now made it a hourly/daily/weekly/whatever task for the detractor to repeat.

imo one account should be able to influence the reaction score of another account by at most one point. formulaically, this would normalise all of account A's reactions to account B to within [-1, +1], and have that be account A's contribution to account B's reaction score.

if you're a proliferate but harmless poster, the most a hater can do is knock you down a point. if you're an asshat and piss off the community at large, your score will reflect that (i think)

This would have to be changed to once per day. Because let’s say only a few people comment on a weekly manga and one user is making consistently good posts every week, why should they only get a total of few points for it?

 

[strangeirdo]

Your inner workings that you described earlier are your own biases, nothing more. Don't try to pass your stupid assumptions as mere "human psychology" and apply it to the entire population, it's not and comparing them to the first impression you can get from someone's appearance won't make it so either. Also, just because "it happens" doesn't mean you should dumbdown a system because of it. That's encouraging it and downward leveling.

They don't repeat what I said. I said, people "like and dislike", not just dislike. They're two sides of the same coin, and if you can't deal with both of them, you better toss that coin away.
The comparison doesn't even stand anyway. MD users don't make money through their forum popularity for example.

I won't address human psychology, since it's clear we'll never be on the same page, but to say that having a points system is an objective upgrade and changing it is an objective downgrade is incredibly bias of you.

Also "it happens" is one of the best reasons to dumbdown a system. It's practically the definition of precaution.

The reason I never addressed 'like' is because it has a positive connotation, which I'm all down for. Saying that you can only have both or none is like saying I have to harm someone to reward someone else. Plenty of websites use a like only system, for example.

Edit: with that being said, having a like system isn't objectively good either. eg. social media dependence

 

[strangeirdo]

Teasday beings up a really good point. Regardless of whether the point system changes, gets removed, or w/e, I think the reactions should reward 0 points. They're supposed to be fun, and having points attached overcomplifies things for no reason. Especially when some give more/less points than others.

 

[Remocracy]

An alternate solution I have is to make it a downvote deducts one from your score and prevent downvoting your score is below 0.