I didn't think that this new Orange Name feature, which is currently the talk of HN, was a big deal until I read this comment in a completely unrelated thread:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=467657
Without trying to be harsh, and given your 'orange' status I realize I'm walking on thin ice here ;)
[Note how, unprompted, the responder bows and scrapes!]
... and suddenly I realized that I've seen this Frontline documentary before. It's the legendary blue-eyed/brown-eyed experiment:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Elliott
"On that day, a Friday, she decided to make the brown-eyed children the superior first, giving them extra privileges like second helpings at lunch, access to the new jungle gym and five minutes extra at recess. She would not allow blue-eyed and brown-eyed children to drink from the same water fountain. She would offer them praise for being hard-working and intelligent. The “blueys” on the other hand, would be disparaged. She even made the blue-eyed children wear crepe paper armbands.
"At first, there was resistance to the idea that blue-eyed children were not the equals of brown-eyed children. To counter this, she used a pseudo-scientific explanation for her actions by stating that the melanin responsible for making brown-eyed children… also was linked to intelligence and ability, therefore the “blueys” lack of pigmentation would result in lack of these qualities. Shortly thereafter, this initial resistance fell away. Those who were deemed “superior” became arrogant, bossy and otherwise unpleasant to their “inferior” classmates. Their grades also improved, doing mathematical and reading tasks that seemed outside their ability before. The “inferior” classmates also transformed – into timid and subservient children, including those who had previously been dominant in the class. These children’s academic performance suffered, even with tasks that had been simple before.
"The following Monday, Elliott reversed the exercise, making the blue-eyed children superior. While the blue-eyed children did taunt the brown-eyed in ways similar to what had occurred the previous Friday, Elliott reports it was much less intense. At 2:30 on that Monday, Elliott told the brown-eyed children to take off their armbands and the children cried and hugged each other."
I'm not sure what to conclude about this. Except that I want to issue a desperate plea: Please don't go on to reinvent the Stanford Prison Experiment!
I personally think that the real quality measurement of comments is not up to a mere algorithm and a voting system that is so susceptible to bias.
Just looking at my posting history an hour ago or so to see what if any of my '1' rated comments I should take back considering the effect on the average karma over the last of my 50 posts, and I'd have to conclude that for me that really would reduce the value of HN to < 0.
I'd quit, that simple.
Lots of the meta discussion around this subject has been a pretty good learning experience for me, I consider the time on this 'experiment' well spent in that sense, but I think the outcome to date has only been:
- more incentive to game the system
- exploding meta discussions about the subject including one open attempt at revolt
- something deep inside me that I can not put quite in to words that makes me uncomfortable about distinguishing individuals instead by 'their cover' instead of reading what they have to say.