patrick.net

rando says

Anyone want their own site? If you have a username that is just letters and numbers (no spaces) you could possibly get a site like https://wookieman.patrick.net with your own policies for moderation, own CSS, etc.

I'm not ready for the big leagues yet. Just bring back my avatar ;)

WookieMan says

Just bring back my avatar

OK, done

This thread was started by a person who allows everyone to post on it. It should be used rather than the "thunderdome" which I understand Patrick had retired. @Patrick, why do you allow Thunderdome to return?

WookieMan says

I guess I didn't want to call out users, but to make the point I'm going to have to. TPB, HEY YOU, Tovarich, etc.

Just one little problem,you might be thinking that HEY YOU give a shit.
Maybe I should be concerned about the number of threads & comments instead
of overpopulation,environmental degradation, resource depletion,effects on man & his habitat from a warming planet.
WTF am I thinking,this is patnet!

As an aside: New patnet rule
# 1- You must read every thread.

Republican & Democratic voters destroying America should be on the above list.

HEY YOU says

Republican & Democratic voters destroying America should be on the above list.

Ok, I'll bite. who should voters be voting for?

PeopleUnited says

Patrick, why do you allow Thunderdome to return?

Actually, I didn't allow it to return, they're just using it that way. I suppose I need an "uncivil" thread reporting mechanism.

Patrick-thanks for the site! Like they say don't look a gift horse in the mouth-folks have way too much expectations for something that is free.
I think many of the diehard posters will continue posting no matter what-this is a unique niche where posters have diverse opinions and are allowed to say what they want and no mommy to come rushing to the crybaby's defense. methinks you should have some advertising-not sure if it makes much money-but just a thought-unless this is just a hobby?

Nearly every comment you make is uncivil.

lostand confused says

methinks you should have some advertising-

Methinks so too. You should get.paid.

Who would pay to advertise here? What product or service and to what demographic

It's always been about comedy here.
People that want a laugh should pay for the privilege...

errc says

Who would pay to advertise here? What product or service and to what demographic

errc says

Who would pay to advertise here? What product or service and to what demographic

Who knows maybe repubs and dems , SJWs all might want to advertise ehre-we have a mix of all!!

Dan8267 says

Limiting posts to N a day is attempting to address the symptoms of the problem, not the cause. The problem is not that TPB opens so many threads each day. The problem is that the threads he opens are all shit. Limiting quantity does not improve quality.

There are two workable solutions.

1. Patrick, and perhaps a few other credible users, form a meritocracy that rates threads, dinging shit and delegating it to a less in-your-face bucket. This has the advantage of being quick to implement. The disadvantages are having to manually perform the task every day and human bias, although the later is diminished by having a larger group of reviewers.

2. Implement an A.I. that determines the quality of a thread. This is right up Google's alley. You can use Bayesian analysis, checking the quality of the citations, and/or deep learning. This has the advantages of reduced bias, automation, and immediate feedback. The disadvantage is the time and effort to build the A...

Dan8267 says

Patrick, and perhaps a few other credible users, form a meritocracy that rates threads, dinging shit and delegating it to a less in-your-face bucket.

Yes, that's how it will be.

Still working on the node version of the site, which is open sourced here:

https://github.com/killelea/node.patrick.net

@Dan8267 you know javascript, right? Any interest in implementing part of it?

lostand confused says

methinks you should have some advertising-not sure if it makes much money-but just a thought-unless this is just a hobby?

It's a hobby, but I would love to be able to live from it and just work on it full time.

Was thinking of advertising patrick.net swag like bumper stickers, cups, hats etc for double-duty: makes a little money, and propagates knowledge of the site at the same time. But I keep putting it off because life gets in the way.

Funny thing is, if you just ignored someone's thread, it wouldn't bubble to the top anyway. No fancy thread posting limit script needed.

A daily post limit might help, especially if applied to specific users. @Patrick could grant "Premium" status to certain Users based on payment or trollishness score or whatever (e.g. Patrick seemed to appreciate tovarichpeter's many Posts), encouraging them to Post more. Also, encouraging Users to vote specific Posts up or down, and triple counting down votes, might push the more objectionable stuff off the home page faster.

An advantage of a forum compared to a blog is the forum provides a wider array of topics compared to the interests of only one person. A disadvantage, without Post limits, is the forum (including especially the home page) risks getting taken over by trolls.

A related issue is 'freedom of speech' vs editing/organization. Many of tovarichpeter's Posts might have worked better as comments within his prior Posts on specific topics, e.g. dentists, Hyperloop, 3D printing houses, and tiny houses. Some people (e.g. "HEY YOU") insist as a matter of principle on posting their random thoughts wherever they want, like a child refusing to clean up his room because he prefers the spontaneity of chaos. Giving every author the freedom to post anything anywhere results in a mess for readers.

Goran_K says

if you just ignored someone's thread, it wouldn't bubble to the top anyway.

That works only if you are always logged in, which most ppl aren't. Also, the home page makes the first impression for new users, and it's too embarrassing to recommend when covered with TPB posts.

rando says

https://github.com/killelea/node.patrick.net

BTW, I added an anti-diversity statement to the project, as a reaction to harmful promotion of diversity for its own sake:

https://github.com/killelea/node.patrick.net/blob/master/Anti_diversity_statement.md

curious2 says

A disadvantage, without Post limits, is the forum (including especially the home page) risks getting taken over by trolls.

What do you think of putting posts in the active list only after they get at least one comment from someone other than the post author?

The problem might be that no one would ever think to look in the "new" column and make the first comment on a post, which would then languish in obscurity no matter how good.

What I'm really looking for is a measure of "good" for a post.

rando says

What do you think of putting posts in the active list only after they get at least one comment from someone other than the post author?

Many of the worst Posts get comments, e.g. 'stop posting such trash' and "TenPoundBass strikes again."

Yes, like Goran_K pointed out, if you comment you're actually promoting it back to the top of the home page, no matter what you say in the comment.

Goran_K says

Funny thing is, if you just ignored someone's thread, it wouldn't bubble to the top anyway. No fancy thread posting limit script needed.

This is what I do already. At some point though it's just spam with the frequency. No one will generally comment or acknowledge the dumb ass posts, so they go away for sure. So I think I'm on the same page with you there. I actually think most readers here are doing that with some of the aforementioned posters. But some posters have gotten to the level of spammers at this point. They may think they're trolling others, but everyone basically ignores it like it's spam for the most part. So maybe it's time to treat it that way or have a filter/limit set up for those serial abusers.

Dan8267 says

The problem is not that TPB opens so many threads each day. The problem is that the threads he opens are all shit. Limiting quantity does not improve quality.

There are two workable solutions.

1. Patrick, and perhaps a few other credible users, form a meritocracy that rates threads, dinging shit and delegating it to a less in-your-face bucket. This has the advantage of being quick to implement. The disadvantages are having to manually perform the task every day and human bias, although the later is diminished by having a larger group of reviewers.

I don't have a problem with solution #1 here and think it's one way to attack the problem. My issue for the most part is with the limiting of quantity. Unless you've created a list of articles you've read over the last 3 hours, 24 hours or week and then post them all at once, there's really no way someone can put out 8 articles in an hour, at least thoughtfully in my opinion. I like many of the posters here, whether I agreement them or not, for posting informative stuff but also giving some of their ideas.

I guess I'm not a fan of posting a headline, the first paragraph and moving on. I could do that 20 times and hour, but what's the point of that? If you want to act like a news feed, then create your own site, get traffic to said site and watch it grow if you think the articles you're throwing up are any good. That type of behavior here is annoying, but this is just my opinion. But based on this post and others it seems there is a growing problem or at least the perception of a problem.

lostand confused says

Patrick-thanks for the site! Like they say don't look a gift horse in the mouth-folks have way too much expectations for something that is free.

I agree with this. I just know in the past Patrick has looked for feedback on some things. If he stopped tomorrow it wouldn't be the end of the world for any of us, or so I hope. I also don't think he would be doing this if there was some enjoyment or satisfaction in it (I'm not saying that's what you're saying with the comment). On a good day the site is really enjoyable. On a bad day I take one look and go somewhere else. That's all I'm getting at in the long run.

curious2 says

Patrick could grant "Premium" status to certain Users based on payment or trollishness score

Pay-for-troll? Wow, that would make Patrick a millionaire. Go for it.

This is the most brilliant business model I've ever heard. Monetize trolls.

rando says

curious2 says

A disadvantage, without Post limits, is the forum (including especially the home page) risks getting taken over by trolls.

What do you think of putting posts in the active list only after they get at least one comment from someone other than the post author?

The problem might be that no one would ever think to look in the "new" column and make the first comment on a post, which would then languish in obscurity no matter how good.

What I'm really looking for is a measure of "good" for a post.

A lot of people read posts but don't necessarily wish to comment. If there was a way to rank posts based on page views by (people other than the author) rather than time of most recent comment it would give the user the hot topic of the day based on what people are reading rather than just what trolls and other users are saying.

The biggest concern from a user perspective is the reduced value of time spent on Patnet due to:

1. Ad hominem and uncivil comments
2. Segregation and censorship by the ban button
3. Excessive posting by a vocal minority

PeopleUnited says

If there was a way to rank posts based on page views by (people other than the author) rather than time of most recent comment it would give the user the hot topic of the day based on what people are reading

There are tabs to sort Posts by most "active" "comments" "likes" and "new", so a "views" tab would make sense. There is no perfect solution though. For example, if you post an accurate headline and summary short enough to fit the home page, it might not get many views, because you've covered the topic. On the other hand, if Blurtman posts a provocative headline without accurate summary, people might view it to see what it's about, even if it turns out to be a waste of time.

Here's TPB's most recent post count per day:


select count(*), cast(post_date as date) as d from posts left join users on post_author=user_id
where user_name='Tenpoundbass' group by d order by d desc limit 20;
+----------+------------+
| count(*) | d |
+----------+------------+
| 8 | 2017-08-03 |
| 16 | 2017-08-02 |
| 13 | 2017-08-01 |
| 6 | 2017-07-31 |
| 7 | 2017-07-30 |
| 7 | 2017-07-28 |
| 5 | 2017-07-27 |
| 3 | 2017-07-26 |
| 8 | 2017-07-25 |
| 6 | 2017-07-24 |
| 3 | 2017-07-23 |
| 5 | 2017-07-22 |
| 2 | 2017-07-21 |
| 4 | 2017-07-20 |
| 1 | 2017-07-18 |
| 4 | 2017-07-17 |
| 1 | 2017-07-16 |
| 2 | 2017-07-15 |
| 1 | 2017-07-14 |
| 15 | 2017-07-13 |
+----------+------------+


curious2 says

There are tabs to sort Posts by most "active" "comments" "likes" and "new", so a "views" tab would make sense. There is no perfect solution though.

I did have a "views" tab at one point, but thought comments was better because it proves at least enough interest that someone responded. Also, you can pump the views number easily just by reloading the page over and over. I could make that harder to do, like requiring consecutive views to come from different IP addresses in order to be counted, but it's work, and could still be gamed.

Maybe net likes is the best? That's what Hackernews and Reddit use for their home pages. But not all that many people are using the vote up and down arrows on the home page.

OK, likes it is for the home page if you're not logged in.

That works only if you are always logged in, which most ppl aren't. Also, the home page makes the first impression for new users, and it's too embarrassing to recommend when covered with TPB posts.

----------

The Virtual Trumpkin Blumpkin

rando says

select count(*), cast(post_date as date) as d from posts left join users on post_author=user_id

where user_name='Tenpoundbass' group by d order by d desc limit 20;

There's a bug in your query. Please run the corrected query.

select count(*), cast(post_date as date) as d from posts left join users on post_author=user_id
where user_name='Tenpoundbass'; delete posts from posts left join users on post_author=user_id where user_name='Tenpoundbass'; -- group by d order by d desc limit 20;

rando says

Maybe net likes is the best?

No, trolls just dislike all posts by authors they hate. You'd have to use a more sophisticated like sorting algorithm such as


decimal total = 0.0;

for each like in likes
total += Agreement(self.userId, like.userId) * like.value;


where like.user is the ID of the user who submitted the like and agreement(int userIdA, int userIdB) is a function that returns a heuristic from -1.0 to 1.0 indicating how many times the logged in user, self.userId, likes the same thing the like.userId user likes and how often the two users disagree. Something like...


decimal Agreement (int userIdA, int userIdB)
{
IEnumerable likesA = likes.Where(like => like.userId = userIdA);
IEnumerable likesB = likes.Where(like => like.userId = userIdB);

return agreement;
}


The value of decimal Like.value can be either one of the choices (1 like, 0 neutral, -1 dislike) or a value in the range [-1.0, 1.0] indicating how much the post is liked by the reviewer. The above algorithm will work either way.

The effect of using this technique is that if Bob agrees with Joe most of the time, Bob will see recommendations of Joe. However, if Bob disagrees with Sam most of the time, then Bob will be recommended things that Sam hates and vice versa. In other words, if two users have the same tastes, their likes are complimentary. But if two users have different tastes, each one's like counts as a dislike for the other while each one's dislike counts as a like for the other.

This makes gaming likes and dislikes impossible. The more trolls dislike a user's posts, the higher it rates with someone who dislikes that troll.

This is what you should implement on PatNet. Of course, it only works for users who log in and like or dislike posts. Otherwise they get no recommendations. And that's fair. How do you recommend something to someone you don't know and thus don't know what he or she likes?

@Patrick, the code tag does not preserve whitespaces.

Yes, shit. Will fix in node version.

Dan8267 says

The effect of using this technique is that if Bob agrees with Joe most of the time, Bob will see recommendations of Joe.

Isn't this what Facebook does, and results in echo chambers where you see only things you agree with already?

errc says

Who would pay to advertise here? What product or service and to what demographic

Duh, Canned Yams.

Precisely.
One can get the same effect by banning all people they disagree with most of the time...

rando says

Isn't this what Facebook does, and results in echo chambers where you see only things you agree with already?

Maybe if we fed him and jacked him up to 12 lbs he'd be too stuffed to post as much...

rando says

Here's TPB's most recent post count per day:



select count(*), cast(post_date as date) as d from posts left join users on post_author=user_id

where user_name='Tenpoundbass' group by d order by d desc limit 20;

+----------+------------+

| count(*) | d |

+----------+------------+

The liberals ruined everything with high taxes

Only God and Guns can save us now

Friggin obama

And SJW and trannys!

Muslims in Afghanistan blargle glib blah

Vote Republican 4 life

rando says

Isn't this what Facebook does, and results in echo chambers where you see only things you agree with already?

It's called assortative mating. You actually get conversations with people that you have similar values to, not necessarily agree with. For example, Bob likes the same posts that Joe likes, but Joe likes some posts that introduce him to new ideas contradicting his current views. As a result, Bob sees those same new ideas that contradict Joe's views, and thus likely Bob's views.

You only get the echo chamber effect if you only like things that agree with your current views and only dislike things that contradict your current views. If you do that, then you are in effect asking only to see things that reinforce your current views. The solution is to like things more often and more heavily, if likes are non-binary, that are both insightful and surprising to you. This is what I do already.

Assortative mating is the correct approach to recommendations. That is why it is used throughout the IT and marketing industries. Amazon's product recommendations are also based on this idea.

TwoScoopsMcGee says

Duh, Canned Yams.