Submission karma is utterly worthless. All it means is you submit tons of shit, by hand or by bot. In the last year or two there's been a handful of accounts that made the Leaders list [0] by auto or mass submitting generic tech sites (techcrunch, ars, wired etc... really "safe" stuff), even a couple of company spammers were on it at one point! There's no way to win that contest, but more importantly it's not a measure of anything valuable.

Comment karma is worth paying attention to because it doesn't hinge on being the first to submit whatever AOL just shat out.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/leaders

Well submission and comment karma are the same karma on HN so it's hard to tell them apart the only other factor you can look at that might be reasonable or a popularity contest is the average as I believe that only pertains to comment karma.

Yeah that's something I wish they would separate out, on top of the combined score the average itself is not calculated in real time and discards outliers and I think only looks at your recent comments so it's not even a perfect measure, just a better one than submission karma.

I would like to see karma more focused on contribution - comments of course, but also finding quality stories that aren't on mainstream sites.

Just like normal karma, the only person you are competing with is yourself. I enjoy it when I write a comment that others either appreciate or agree with and think is the "correct" sentiment, and find that downvotes are sometimes interesting as well as I find that I may be in the minority on a viewpoint.

The only thing I find sometimes irritating is that sometimes when I am flip I get more upvotes than when I am being serious, but maybe it's just HN telling me to speak my mind more.

How I deal with this is by remembering that life seems like a luck function more than actual Karma. If I want to do good, I do that just because it is the right thing to do. Whether I am rewarded for that or not, I can decide to keep on doing good.

Define "fair". People upvote a thread/comment when it is something they are interested in or agree with. What's "unfair" about that? It's a measure of popularity, not inherent worthiness.

What's unfair about it? He was able to report it first and thus got karma for it. Although I agree that comments should have more weight than posting links. But I think it's a chicken and egg story.

> But I think it's a chicken and egg story.

Boot karma.

Karma hardly matters, so I guess it doesn't matter if it's unfair.

It's not as bad as you think. The submitting member only gets the submission upvotes. The comment upvotes go the individual commenters. So d1egoaz only got 791 points.

I think most communities that rely on a points system need it to be a little "unfair" as incentive for taking the time and effort to find and post fresh content.

Speaking of fairness, "Google [is/]was down" is/was about 500 times more interesting to hackers than this thread.

There are only 42 people on this site with more karma than me. I think the karma system is fine and you should stop complaining.

;)

It's just fake internet points. "Unfair" presumes there is some sort of intent to engineer fairness at HN when it appears they are just trying ton engineer tailored content. It's best to find a start-up or side project to work on instead of worrying about internet points. But HN is a great place for procrastinating coders.