Talk:810: Constructive

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search

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)


Okay, I came here to get a better explanation of how the system would actually work. Assuming it operates at sign-up, the bots would go through and rate comments, which would have no effect if the system didn't already know whether they were good or not, then it makes it own comments that need time to be rated; so you would have to give it time to start 'contributing' to the community while waiting for others to rate it, or else users would basically be on a community-approval waiting list. So in short, I feel like the system is flawed; presumably because I'm understanding it wrong. (Bonus: Captcha while posting this) - Zergling_man 162.158.2.231 12:41, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Tools

It seems you are using noscript, which is stopping our project wonderful ads from working. Explain xkcd uses ads to pay for bandwidth, and we manually approve all our advertisers, and our ads are restricted to unobtrusive images and slow animated GIFs. If you found this site helpful, please consider whitelisting us.

Want to advertise with us, or donate to us with Paypal?