Re: (2) Proportional Reputation (avoid encouraging controversy for it's own sake)

[ybiC]

A potential drawback to measuring and publishing a Most Controversial Nodes list would be that of encouraging controversy for controversy's sake.

I enjoy as much as the next monk heated discussions, debate, and especially the multiplicity of viewpoints, opinions, and experiences that folks bring to the Monastery.   But I moreso enjoy Perl Monks as an oasis of civil, considerate behavior amidst the often rude and flaming desert that is the Internet.

So my guess is that the interesting info and feedback that Most Controversial Nodes would provide could easily be overshadowed by negative impact.   KnowwhatImeanVerne?
  cheers,
  ybiC

  striving toward Perl Adept
  (it's pronounced "why-bick")

[crenz]

encouraging controversy for controversy's sake

Quite true also... thanks for pointing that out; I was maybe getting carried away by my curiosity :).

[agentv]

> encouraging controversy for controversy's sake.

...and yet, I have to say that there is a valid distinction between a reputation 12 node that has been voted on a mere 12 times, and one that has garnered 100 votes, with a mild bias in favor of the good.

This distinction may be illuminating, but of course we must also keep in mind that we don't see a node's reputation until after we've made a decision about it ourselves.

...All the world looks like -well- all the world, when your hammer is Perl.
---v