zlacker

>>Imusta+(OP)
Very cool. I made the top 1,000 too.

It would be interesting to see karma-per-word, as well, as a kind of succinctness density factor. Although karma points are not equivalent to quality, and you’d need to also factor in average comment length and some other things.

To use myself:

31,273 karma / 351,012 words ≈ 0.0891 karma per word

>>keifer+kaa
#33 here. I have written .. a lot of words. I don't know whether they're correctly excluding ">" quoted words though.

A quirky feature of HN is that you can only see detailed karma counts for your own posts. One of these days I plan to scrape all of mine so I can sort by karma and do some meta-commentary.

>>pjc50+4ma
Karma depends entirely on when you comment: My most upvoted comments are the early ones. I check HN perhaps once a day, so my comments don't always get a lot of visibility. Perhaps it's better that way.

>>tasuki+ACa
I mean, no, karma depends entirely on the contents of your comment :P I've have comments go from 0 to -4 to 50 to 10 over the course of one day, probably I'd say the flunctionations depends more on how controversial ("hot take") your comment is, but if it's generally good, it tends to be upvoted while more emotional/nonsense appeals tend to be downvoted. Pretty much as expected :)

>>embedd+SEa
Your comment is never going to get 75 votes on it if it only gets in front of 25 eyes, regardless of how good, bad, offensive, or insightful it is.

Especially on political threads you'll see the most milquetoast takes imaginable basically locked at the top of the page because they were commented 2 minutes after the post was made, and all the fighting happens underneath.