Difference between revisions of "Talk:810: Constructive"
(adding comment) |
|||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
One problem: trolls who rate everything as non-constructive. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.11|108.162.218.11]] 01:32, 1 March 2014 (UTC) | One problem: trolls who rate everything as non-constructive. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.11|108.162.218.11]] 01:32, 1 March 2014 (UTC) | ||
:But Trolls like that are also unable to make constructive comments, so they won't get counted anyway (at least, if the system is designed with any sense) Anonymous 15:02, 20 March 2014 (UTC) | :But Trolls like that are also unable to make constructive comments, so they won't get counted anyway (at least, if the system is designed with any sense) Anonymous 15:02, 20 March 2014 (UTC) | ||
+ | |||
+ | Guys, isn't this how Slashdot works? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.49.64|173.245.49.64]] 19:04, 4 June 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:04, 4 June 2014
I know just the guy to create this system. I'm going to PM him now :D 184.11.73.88 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)
No guys, if spammers invent a bot which can give constructive comments, that will be an ***AI***, i.e. a major breakthrough in itself. 173.245.53.200 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)
Mission. A-Fucking. Complished. 108.162.238.7 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)
One problem: trolls who rate everything as non-constructive. 108.162.218.11 01:32, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
- But Trolls like that are also unable to make constructive comments, so they won't get counted anyway (at least, if the system is designed with any sense) Anonymous 15:02, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Guys, isn't this how Slashdot works? 173.245.49.64 19:04, 4 June 2014 (UTC)