Re: Possible changes to Voting/XP

[Abigail-II]

A node's reputation is, for the most part, a reflection of how your peers view what you have written.

Peers? Peers? "Peer review" usually involves (careful) selection. Academic journals have "peer reviews", and that doesn't involve letting anyone with a subscription vote on a submission. Instead, a (hopefully) knowlingly board selects people to review the submission. Unlike the situation at Perlmonks where anyone and his dog can create one or more accounts and vote. Now, I'm not going to argue about the rest of your article, but a node's reputation isn't decided by peers.

Abigail

[Limbic~Region]

Abigail,
You are correct. To be honest, I do not feel that a lot of the monks here are my peers. Quite the opposite, I feel that their capabilities are far above my own with you included. I struggled with the right word to use there. I guess I could have said "members of the PM community" in lieu of peers. But while we are not all on even footing in regards to our abilities as programmers, monks level 2 and higher are all able to vote.

I will leave the original text as is though I agree with your point of contention.

Cheers - L~R

[herveus]

Howdy!

Yes, "peers". He didn't say "peer review", but "how your peers view" -- a more colloquial statement.

Everyone here is, in one sense, my peer, in the same way that a jury panel is drawn from "my peers".

At the risk of seeming pedantic, I agree that "...a node's reputation isn't decided by peers." It's decided by "my peers", not some collection of Earls, Barons, and Dukes. *grin*