questionshow would community deals and atc be different if…


I think for a lot of the active users, the personality and vibe of the postings would make it reasonably clear who was who. If the userbase was larger, it'd have a more profound effect.

I think the impact would probably be slightly more negative than positive, as people would probably snipe at each other more. Also, as it is I think it breads more of a sense of community.

Still, interesting question.


I like the idea but I would have to agree with @psaux personalities and vibes would be very clear and noticeable, especially around the very active members.

I must say however that I was very impressed with the focus of this question its a breath of fresh air compared to a lot of the questions posted in the past several weeks.


Imagine all the life in peace. You may say that I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one.


That is an interesting thought. Imagine how the top deals section would change... I think ATC wouldn't change much because those active would recognize each other.

vote-for11vote-against handle is my identity. Without it, I would have an existential crisis and might cease to exist! Noooooo!

Eh, probably couldn't pick any of you out of a lineup anyhow. But I like the avatars and whatnot. Without them, it's like every other comments section on a local news site.


donkey porn would be everywhere.


@panthiest: I like the way you think... err.. I mean... er... I'm glad it's not.. ? Am I?


i'm no one either way.

no1 no1

Don't think it'd make much of a difference. As someone said's "rigged" & "dying" anyway. And someone else said, long ago..."The bloom is off the rose." Or something like that. But what do I know? And who am I to say? <---both rhetorical questions.

...will quietly wait for the cheerleaders to come in and lead us in a woot chant now. /sarcasm


@iggz: Look at you! A "starred" member. ;)

Good question. Anonymity brings out the knives in a lot of people. People can be real piss ants at times. Other than the colored triangles denoting a busy/active member and giving a bit of reliable standing in the community, I think the whole leaderboard/reputation could go away without changing the basic Deals model. It might even cut back the amount of crap questions that clog the board. I don't mind non-deals/fun questions, but the ones that are obvious rep-drivers without a point are pretty worthless.


It would be worse. On the anonymous internet communities I've observed, such as Usenet and 4chan, most users act like cranky middle schoolers because there's really no incentive not to. Specifically to deals.woot though I think we'd see a major rise in spamming/shilling... sure, we have shills now, but at least they're generally easy to spot and usually get called out on it.


@no1: I see what you did there...
As for the question, I don't think I would like it nearly as much. I like being able to see the familiar "names" associated with comments -- agree though that I'd be able to pick out some of the more familiar ones, but it would be different...not sure if I think it'd be a positive change.


I'm not sure there's an ultimate answer to either side of the options.

I suspect having a name attached encourages some personal accountability, drives participation ("see your name in lights,"), and allows people to recognize content they wish to participate in more readily. On the other hand, you may get less honest questions, pandering to the scoreboard/community, and, sometimes, breed conflict. Not to mention, it becomes a fair bit more difficult to filter out spam.

I wonder about the potential for an anonymous submission mechanic, or allowing a flag for "no reputation gained." What about de-emphasizing the username? It could appear on mouse-over, or only after clicking through. Would weighting certains tags or types of questions to be worth less in score have a similar effect?


but then how would you know who to harass?
this is a terrible idea!


@gatzby: why is there a leaderboard at all? as long as there are broad categories that people fit into (e.g. "black triangles"), that would seem to suffice for establishing general credibility. displaying the finer gradations (scores) just encourages jockeying for position.

no1 no1

@pemberducky: just harass the accounts with wootstaff badges.

no1 no1

@gatzby: depends on what you want, i suppose. you may get pandering to the scoreboard, and, sometimes, breed conflict.

no1 no1

@gatzby: I don't really see why it would be more difficult to filter out spam. I think it would be the exact same. Moderators would obviously still see the IDs for everyone and their job would continue as normal.

The ID would still be linked, it would just not be visible on the Deals side for members.

The IDs would still be visible on the standard Woot sites and still linked to their Deals account.

If I were Woot, I wouldn't want to retard participation because the leaderboard shows the same people all the time. The moment you put rankings out in the open and it is obvious that the same people are consistently ranked in a high position- there will be a decrease in participation. Competition immediately deceases.

Especially if other people are consistently participating as much as they can in a given day.

I think most of you are wrong in thinking that all the comments would become troll comments if people were anonymous. I think all you would see is an increase in participation.


If you go over to the Deals portion, it's pretty blatantly obvious that black triangle members vote up other black triangle member's deals, which in turn increases their reputation which then keeps them on the leaderboard with a black triangle. Hmmmm.

If you were to take the usernames out, this type of circle-jerk would become minimal because not only do black triangle members vote up other black triangle members, but they especially vote up other black triangle members whose username they know.


My main point is that Woot believes the leaderboard increases participation and good competition when actually I believe it is doing the opposite.

If anything, it is increasing participation and competition between the same 15 people who constantly cycle through the top positions which in turns decreases participation and competition between the many.

The best way to increase competition is to make people compete for something that isn't just attainable by few people. The black triangle alone is enough, but you would need to define exactly what the black triangle means.

There's a ton of different ways the Deals side could function.


@iggz: It becomes more of a challenge to spot it visually, for users and moderators alike. It's not impossible, just more difficult, which lowers the potential value of any question -- something that can happen now, too Basically, you can be suckered in to a "good question" without acknowledgement of source to be bombarded with crap content.

Imagine, user chsk48749 can pull from a body of questions they know will pass muster, then load their post with links to, and blasts the New feed with that... they're anonymous now, so every question a user clicks on looks legit until the body is exposed as spam.

Anonymous versus real name is very much a battle being waged on the internet right now. You see Facebook and Google forcing people to taking personal accountability, but proponents of the old style still point to success like Slashdot, reddit, 4chan, etc. It depends on the goal of your community, I think.