Search Ideas
791 ideas match your query.:
Then a bounty can go on indefinitely.
I would have it that each criticism and counter-criticism resets the countdown on the bounty deadline. This means everyone involved is given fair time to respond at each turn.
Since I am getting an error when I try to edit #2479, I will make a new criticism. I think #2479 is unclear.
I would have it that each criticism and counter-criticism resets the countdown on the bounty deadline. This means everyone involved is given fair time to respond at each turn.
A small downside is that a bounty can go on indefinitely, but that is simply an extension of the fact that solutions to problems don’t come reliably.
The counter-criticism moves the deadline forward again the same fixed amount.
I suppose that would make it a bit harder for bad actors because they’d need to monitor multiple deadlines, but they could still submit arbitrary counter-criticisms just in time to avoid paying. Or is there something I’m missing?
The timeframe to address the criticism should start counting down from the moment the criticism is made, rather than the original post. So it would be a continuous thing rather than a single deadline for everyone.
The OP could end the bounty if there are no outstanding criticisms and he no longer seeks a solution.
Yes, that was what I was thinking. Presumably the OP could set their own deadline timeframe too.
As much as I dislike LLMs, I’m thinking of using them to show summaries of discussions at the top of the page. Summaries would reflect ideas without pending criticisms.
But then bad actors could always submit arbitrary counter-criticisms just before the deadline to avoid paying.
I’m not sure yet, but I’m playing with the idea that the criticism can’t have any pending counter-criticisms by some deadline.
Why should reacts persist through revisions?
How do you ensure the criticism is worthy of the bounty?
Not if I do reactions on a per-paragraph basis. I think that’s a new feature none of those sites have.
The way I picture it, as you hover over different paragraphs, a reaction button appears and moves between paragraphs. So it would always be clear that reactions are on specific paragraphs. The user would pick whatever paragraph they most wish to react to.
Then what does somebody do who wants to react to an idea as a whole? Do they react to the last paragraph?
For reactions to paragraphs, at least you could tell if the content someone reacted to has changed, and only then remove the reaction.
But presumably, the same is true for reactions to ideas as a whole. Reactions would have to be removed for revisions.
It isn’t clear what would happen during a revision. A paragraph might be changed or deleted. Too complicated.
Feature idea: pay people to criticize your idea.
You submit an idea with a ‘criticism bounty’ of ten bucks per criticism received, say.
The amount should be arbitrarily customizable.
I could implement reactions on a per-paragraph basis.
There’s value in others being able to react as well. Maybe an idea affects them in some way or they want to voice support.
There’s value in reacting to top-level ideas, too.