6 upvotes, 2 direct replies (showing 2)
View submission: [Proposal] Dynamic Karma Cap
There's a couple issues by going by what the top users are getting, instead of percentage of karma or moon distribution
It's never gonna be consistent.
You can have a few people getting high karma, or many. You can get very different results.
You can have people skewing that average with very high karma. If too many bad actors game the system and have 80K karma, the cap could still end up being 60K karma for those top users.
The karma cap was never meant to be something to punish anyone who's a top user, but to keep a single person from taking a big percentage of the distribution.
What about the times no one is trying to game the system, or moon farm, and everyone has low karma? People at the top will still get punished no matter what?
That's why I prefer proposals that change the market cap to a percentage of the moon distribution.
Like 0.1% or 0.2% of moons distributed that month as the cap.
Comment by IHaventEvenGotADog at 27/02/2022 at 01:48 UTC*
3 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Thanks for your input. I'll try and address each point.
It's never gonna be consistent.
Neither is the subreddit. Its a constantly evolving thing. This at the very least will adjust to it at some level.
​
You can have a few people getting high karma, or many. You can get very different results.
You can have people skewing that average with very high karma. If too many bad actors game the system and have 80K karma, the cap could still end up being 60K karma for those top users.
So for full disclosure I'm not an expert on how the percentile system works, I sort of know though and the numbers I've been messing around with make me think this is a good system for all/most eventualities I can dream up. I'm happy to be schooled if I'm wrong.
It doesn't work from an average, so even if the top 10 all scored 100,000 it would still be at the same if they got 15k.The more users on the list the larger the 0.1% is so the lower down the list the cap will be, regardless of how much each user earns.
But yeah I suppose if you could get more than 42 users to all fucking power farm 80k then we'd have a problem, kinda unlikely though. I doubt anyone could get over 30k with all the current caps and restrictions we have.
The admins gave me the data before the cap was added for 3 or 4 rounds and the highest was 28k in round 16, which was before the diminishing karma system was implemented.
I've applied this to all the previous rounds so even before the 15k cap when it was a free for all and the numbers all look good.Doing it like this isn't affected by how much the very top users are getting, it more depends on how many users are on the list.
Every system can be manipulated if someone wants to do it badly enough, this just adds an extra level of difficulty.
The karma cap was never meant to be something to punish anyone who's a top users, but to keep a single person from taking a big percentage of the distribution.
Yep, I'm not intending to punish anyone. I think the general consensus is that the majority of the users at the top of the list consistently are only doing it for the Moons and treat it like a job. Also, it benefits the other 99.9% of users. I just want a dynamic cap and this is the best way I can think of doing it
That's why I prefer proposals that change the market cap to a percentage of the moon distribution.
Like 0.1% or 0.2% of moons distributed that month as the cap.
I've looked at that and I don't like it. Just my opinion though.
Comment by Optimal_Store at 27/02/2022 at 00:49 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
So you think it's possible that enough bad actors could collude to push the cap higher by posting as much as humanly possible?