I'd love it if the number of ++ s a rant has, to only be shown after you either ++ the rant or open it. thing is, I found my self scrolling through my algo feed and looking at the ++ count before the post itself. I was judging the post by the number of ++s it has. which made me realize that I skipped a couple of posts that I didn't read and that I could've liked.
what do you guys think about this?

Your post had 0 ++'s so I doubt anyone will read it 😬

edit: fixed it

@ihatecomputers guess people who suffer from my problem would still skip it though XD. thanks for the ++ though 😁

The correct layer for solving your issue is layer 8.

I like the idea! There should be an option where you can turn the display on and off before voting.

yeah. She (@7400) gets it.

Isn’t that kind of the point of rating posts though: so others can find the good ones?

@devios1 yeah but without being biased towards the rants with high ++s and leaving the ones that don't have that much ++s

@Admin-who I do like how it doesn’t show the user unless you tap on it. Helps cut down on popularity votes.

I don't know, usually I look at posts in one of the following manners:
- Many upvotes, few comments: probably a good post, let's read
- Many comments compared to the upvotes: probably controversial, or a question that people wanted to answer on.. let's skim through it real quick and see what it's about, maybe I can chime in too
- Not many upvotes or comments yet: probably a new post, let's see what it's all about

For comments it's usually a matter of reliance on the judgment (by lack of a better word) of other members, so that I can save time by not having to read through all of them. So yeah, ambiguity would impede that and cost me more time, preventing me from seeing the posts that I don't have time to read altogether (which would make things worse). This issue (if one could call it that) is really a social one rather than an algorithmic/technical one.

I'm usually more inclined to read through the daily/weekly top posts rather than the feed though, so I'm probably a bit biased.

@Condor hmmmm. haven't really considered this point of view.

now that I think about it I think I'll stick to your methods lol. I haven't taken the number of comments into consideration at all. will start doing that and see how it goes.

Interesting idea.

@dfox does this mean that it's taken into consideration XD