Timeline for Crackpots and links to crackpot articles in their profile
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 9, 2018 at 7:44 | comment | added | ACuriousMind Mod | @The_Sympathizer you're absolutely correct - downvoting content because of the author instead of the actual content is serial voting and will be reversed in cases where it is detected, and can even result in a suspension for the voter. | |
| Jan 9, 2018 at 7:33 | comment | added | The_Sympathizer | So your answer is right as to the solution - I just thought I'd add some extra points that I felt needed to be in there to clear it up more and highlight the underlying problem. Make sure the reputation score accurately reflects the content posted. So if there's a lot of crackpot content then flag it down, but don't let that go to prejudice where you flag everything down without checking its veracity (which is also a logical fallacy). That would also be making the score inaccurate but in the opposite way. | |
| Jan 9, 2018 at 7:32 | comment | added | The_Sympathizer | (cont'd) Which also answers the original question - the reason that "crackpots" appear here is because the site judges content based on its merit. And the reputation score of an individual user is the sum-total of all merit and demerit obtained by their content, given primarily by votes thereon (upvotes for positive, down for negative, acceptance of answers for more positives, and answers worth more than questions). Which, I'd contend, is what really matters in the end - the content, since that's what's actually useful, what people come here for, and the reason the site exists. | |
| Jan 9, 2018 at 7:27 | comment | added | The_Sympathizer | Yes. But also make sure not to downvote answers from the same people that are not wrong or unsupported by established evidence. A stopped clock can still be right twice a day and furthermore many "crackpots" are not entirely stopped clocks, even if they're flakier than we'd like them to be. (They may "just know enough to be dangerous" - have enough knowledge that they could actually answer some questions legitimately, but for others, have wild speculation that is not a legitimate answer.) In other words, downvotes should be based entirely and solely on answer content and its veracity.(cnt'd) | |
| Dec 14, 2017 at 13:56 | history | answered | ACuriousMindMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |