Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
There's more than one way to do things
 
PerlMonks  

++ vote for people who help in Chatterbox

by songahji (Friar)
on May 20, 2005 at 17:47 UTC ( #459074=monkdiscuss: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

Hi, yesterday, demerphq, diotalevi,bart and castaway helped me on discussion about curry code below
sub print_t{ my $fh = shift; sub{ for( @_[1..$#_] ){ map{ print { $_->[0] } $_->[1] } grep $_, [ $fh, "$_\n" ], $_[0] && [ *STDOUT, "$_[0] $_ +...\n" ] } 1 } } sub openLog{ local *OUT; open OUT, ">logs/$_[0]."; *OUT } my @print_subs = map{ print_t $_ } map{ openLog $_ } qw( error img_cs proc );
Is there anyway, we can have a special page, or someway for me to cast my upvotes to them so they can go to perlmart and get some nice beers or something?

Greets,
Hanny J

Comment on ++ vote for people who help in Chatterbox
Download Code
Re: ++ vote for people who help in Chatterbox
by jeffa (Chancellor) on May 20, 2005 at 17:50 UTC

    Easy. Just go to their home node. Click on the link for their writeups -- that will take you to Perl Monks User Search (for example castaway's user search) and sort by Highest Rep first. Pick some of those and there is a good chance they will receive an XP boost when you ++. But do read the content first and make sure you agree.


    jeffa

    L-LL-L--L-LL-L--L-LL-L--
    -R--R-RR-R--R-RR-R--R-RR
    B--B--B--B--B--B--B--B--
    H---H---H---H---H---H---
    (the triplet paradiddle with high-hat)
    

      Some people, like me, have only written replies and no root nodes. A reply should always be read in its context hence you likely have to read a whole lot more than just the writeup. Even for root nodes you should read the replies as they might provide enlightening insights on the subject, so I wouldn't say this is a good method to ++ someone. It's a whole lot of work if you just want to ++.

      It's a method, but I don't find it very satisfactory.

      Update: I'm not sure who you (jeffa) are arguing with in your reply, but I couldn't agree more. I think that in large the same applies to replies to posts too.

      ihb

      See perltoc if you don't know which perldoc to read!

        The "problem" is that there is no method for giving XP to a user without ++'ing a node. We could add stock buttons to everyone's home node, "++ this user!" ... but isn't that just opening a can of worms? The beauty about the moderation system here is you can vote once and only once for a given node. Sure, you could create another account (sock puppet), and even though we have means of determining such accounts and means to remove their voting priveledge ... it's still not 100% fool proof. I could register an account at an Internet cafe and only use it there.

        I'm afraid that there simply is no satifactory way to achieve what the original poster wants. But you know what? Most of the CB denizens aren't talking in the CB for XP points. They do it because they genuinely want to help -- without reward of XP. This, in essence, is a non-problem.

        jeffa

        L-LL-L--L-LL-L--L-LL-L--
        -R--R-RR-R--R-RR-R--R-RR
        B--B--B--B--B--B--B--B--
        H---H---H---H---H---H---
        (the triplet paradiddle with high-hat)
        
        Well, chances are you'll be well rewarded for your time reading the complete thread, and you may end up finding more than one place to ++ somone. :-)

        (Don't tell anyone, but I vote quite rarely these days. I do, occasionally, find a note someone posted whom I wasn't very familiar with before, and then I more or less randomly go over their old posts. I learn a lot, and sometimes ++ a lot too.)

        I read it, came across it again, and this is not pointed towards you so much as everyone else.

        Parent to this post isn't against what jeffa said. It seems more like an amendment or further instruction. Post instruction, he replied with how he feels about it.

        All it sums up to is, if you are going to do it this method, do it right. I find doing it as such inconvenient and wish there was another way about doing it.

        Did I get that right?

        ----
        Give me strength for today.. I will not talk it away..
        Just for a moment.. It will burn through the clouds.. and shine down on me.

      Please don't do that. I don't want anybody voting on my nodes because they're by me. It should only be the quality of the nodes themselves that make you upvote, or if that's how you choose it to be, downvote them.
      I think a better way would be to super search limitied by the author (should already then be much less hard on the server) for keywords related to the subject and upvote a node that is actually related.

      --
      I'm not belgian but I play one on TV. On dit que je parle comme un belge aussi.

Re: ++ vote for people who help in Chatterbox
by dbwiz (Curate) on May 20, 2005 at 20:14 UTC
Re: ++ vote for people who help in Chatterbox
by bradcathey (Prior) on May 20, 2005 at 22:01 UTC

    I have simply gotten (and given) a /msg of thanks which I find much more gratifying than XP, any day.


    —Brad
    "The important work of moving the world forward does not wait to be done by perfect men." George Eliot
Re: ++ vote for people who help in Chatterbox
by davido (Archbishop) on May 21, 2005 at 04:11 UTC

    From my dealings with demerphq, diotalevi, bart, and castaway, I know that they would appreciate a /msg at least as much as, if not a lot more than a simple ++ or two. Sometimes a kind word of thank-you goes a lot farther than yet another positive vote to someone already solidly ensconsed in the halls of sainthood. :) I think I can go out on a limb and say those four contribute for the pleasure of being helpful, and that being the case, a simple thank-you is the best kind of reward.


    Dave

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: monkdiscuss [id://459074]
Approved by coreolyn
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others meditating upon the Monastery: (8)
As of 2014-07-31 23:06 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My favorite superfluous repetitious redundant duplicative phrase is:









    Results (255 votes), past polls