Existentialist Parable

Comment thread starting at https://redirectme.quora.com/SHU…

Kelly Kinkade:

The QCR bot needs to have code in it that detects when it is reverted, disabling it from re-reverting and alerting one of its human masters to review the edit immediately. As far as I can tell, this only happens if one of its human minders happens to notice the situation (that is, reactive rather than proactive supervision), which often doesn’t happen. QCR should definitely not be allowed to revert more than once without human intervention.

However, we (the writers who contribute 100% of the content that appears on Quora) have no say over how QCR behaves. Perhaps one of these days Quora’s administration will remember that without us, they have nothing, and actually pay attention to how weexperience the site.

Robert Thornton:

I can’t think of any commercial reason why they should worry about an individual writer or individual writers. They just need a sufficiently large mass of writers producing a sufficiently large mass of commercially useful content. It doesn’t matter exactly who. They give Top Writer awards and have Top Writer parties not so much, if at all, to keep those Top Writers happy as they do to have a kind of brass ring for those who are interested in acquiring it and to give those who aren’t interested in TW status the impression that Quora is interested in writers as individuals and in the quality of their work that’s other than commercial—so that they will keep producing.

Perfectly reasonable behavior from a certain point of view.

Nick Nicholas:


We’re all fungible, and Quora is an existentialist parable.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *