many of the summaries posted here don’t get very much karma
This is one of the problems I’m criticising, both here and here. I’m confused, your tone seems like you are dismissing the criticism, but you seem to agree on the object level that summaries are undersupplied given their value.
Maybe you think that summaries do give rewards and prestige but only in the long term? In which case, isn’t that a problem that can be sorted by paying people who write good summaries and ensuring that the karma system appropriately rewards summarising?
You can either interpret low karma as a sign that the karma system is broken or that the summaries aren’t sufficiently good. In hindsight I think you’re right and I lean more towards the former—even though people tell me they like my newsletter, it doesn’t actually get that much karma.
I thought you thought that karma was a decent measure since you suggested
Putting the summary up as a Forum post and seeing if it gets a certain number of karma
This is one of the problems I’m criticising, both here and here. I’m confused, your tone seems like you are dismissing the criticism, but you seem to agree on the object level that summaries are undersupplied given their value.
Maybe you think that summaries do give rewards and prestige but only in the long term? In which case, isn’t that a problem that can be sorted by paying people who write good summaries and ensuring that the karma system appropriately rewards summarising?
You can either interpret low karma as a sign that the karma system is broken or that the summaries aren’t sufficiently good. In hindsight I think you’re right and I lean more towards the former—even though people tell me they like my newsletter, it doesn’t actually get that much karma.
I thought you thought that karma was a decent measure since you suggested
as a way to evaluate how good a summary is.
Yeah I think I don’t think karma is as good as I imply here. I’ll change.