GLPHubglpresearchhub.com
Read-only archive. GLP Research Hub is a static community record — nothing here is for sale, no account is needed, and no vote you cast is counted. Why?
Single comment threadYou are looking at one branch of [Meta] we crossed 800k members and nothing about the rules changes — 30 comments in the full submission. View in context.
585
c/meta·submitted 1 months ago by u/ahmed_cardoso

[Meta] we crossed 800k members and nothing about the rules changes

Metabranch of 8 comments

Putting this to the board: we crossed 800k members and nothing about the rules changes. What the ranking does, in case you assume it is hiding something. The hot ordering combines the magnitude of a submission’s score with its age, so that a new post with moderate support can outrank an older one with more. The…

Read the full submission and all 30 comments →

This branch

8 comments, started 1 months ago
u/dizzy_on_standing7 points·1 months ago

Agreed that the top comment is not the best answer. The ranking optimises for early agreement.

replysharereportpermalink
u/ahmed_cardosoOP4 points·1 months ago

What breaks if we make that change?

replysharereportpermalink
u/camila_sandvik5 points·1 months ago

Have you read the published formula, genuinely asking?

replysharereportpermalink
u/scam_taxonomyc/scamalerts6 points·1 months ago

rule-change proposals need a concrete wording, not a complaint

replysharereportpermalink
u/ahmed_cardosoOP3 points·1 months ago

Which rule specifically, and which part of it?

replysharereportpermalink
u/maren_baptista1 point·1 months ago

Yes — a proposal with concrete wording gets discussed. A complaint about the rules in general does not.

replysharereportpermalink
u/kenji_vasquez1 point·1 months ago

The ranking functions are published: the hot ordering combines score magnitude with age, and the controversial ordering weights total volume by the balance between up and down votes. Both are reproducible from the numbers on each submission.

replysharereportpermalink
u/saskia_mwangi1 point·1 months ago

Proposed a rule change here with actual wording and it was adopted. That is the process working and it is not fast.

replysharereportpermalink

← back to the whole thread

About c/meta

Site governance in public: rule changes, moderation decisions and appeals, how the ranking works, wiki maintenance, sponsor disclosure, and the periodic argument about whether c/vendorvetting evidence standards are too strict. They are not.

23kmembers
62submissions
Aug 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

Sigma-Aldrich Standards

Certified reference materials for peptide identity and purity work.

sigmaaldrich.com
More in c/meta
c/meta rules
  1. Moderation appeals go through modmail first; Meta is for policy, not individual cases.
  2. Rule-change proposals need a concrete wording suggestion.
  3. Sponsor and disclosure questions are always answered publicly.
  4. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  5. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  6. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  7. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  8. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  9. Be recognisably decent. Disagree hard, insult nobody.
Full rules and how they are enforced →
Moderators
u/hub_opsu/mod_ambulatoryu/rulebook_rachaelu/quiet_moderator
Volunteers. Unpaid, unaffiliated, and reachable through modmail only.
Before you read on

Several compounds discussed on GLP Research Hub are sold for research use only and are not approved for human use anywhere. Nothing here is medical advice and none of it is written by your clinician. If a post reads like an instruction, treat it as a description of what one stranger did.

Full disclaimer →