Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
We don't bite newbies here... much

(tye)Re: Self-actualization...

by tye (Sage)
on Jun 11, 2002 at 22:36 UTC ( #173679=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re: Re: Self-actualization...
in thread Self-actualization considered harmful (no more "self front-paging/approving")

As a level 10 monk, I can be trusted to know what nodes are worth approving and what nodes are not, unless they are my own?

Yes, exactly. Like I said, it is easy to develop a blind spot when it comes to your own writing. I've seen it happen. I've even had high-level monks /msg me asking to unapprove their question shortly after it happens.

Just a thought, wouldn't a vote on this been appropriate?

Well, in my experience, a full-blown vote is rarely going to give you a great indication. The results of the vote are highly influenced by extraneous items like the wording of the question (or even the replies). And, frankly, I don't consider this particular issue nearly big enough to warrant such effort.

If this is an unpopular change, we'll certainly know fairly soon due to this announcement and its replies. And this change isn't something that will be difficult to undo.

When I first mentioned this idea, I got negative feedback from several people. So I dropped it. Today, I got lots of positive feedback (from multiple people in multiple forums including the chatterbox, editors' wiki, and #perlmonks). I specifically sought out people who had previously been against it and got positive feedback from them as well. So I did call for a limited set of votes.

Personally, I don't feel that strongly either way on the self-approval issue itself. But I do feel strongly that just biting the bullet and disallowing self-approval will more thoroughly retire the issue than allowing self-approval but not self-frontpaging. I predict that, soon enough, the vast majority of monks will just come to accept that you don't approve your own nodes.

And I predict that allowing self-approval would result in this issue being discussed over and over again when someone notices that only one of the checkboxes is disabled for their own nodes, that someone has approved their own node of questionable value, etc.

I might not get help because the few monks logged in are not of a high enough level to see it.

I'd s/see/approve/. You can't make nodes that low-level monks can't see. Approval mostly makes them easier for infrequent visitors to notice. And even AnonyMonk can see the Chatterbox, so feel free to promote your node there. But I think this is a particularly unlikely scenario, especially these days (and I don't consider developing a blind spot to one's own question to be unlikely). I think footpad addresses this point well so I'll defer further comment.

        - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: (tye)Re: Self-actualization...
by shotgunefx (Parson) on Jun 11, 2002 at 22:40 UTC
    Well, one good thing is that we don't have to hear any bitching about it anymore. :)


    "To be civilized is to deny one's nature."

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://173679]
and all is quiet...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chanting in the Monastery: (4)
As of 2017-03-28 04:23 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    Should Pluto Get Its Planethood Back?

    Results (326 votes). Check out past polls.