good chemistry is complicated, and a little bit messy -LW |
|
PerlMonks |
Re^3: Why downvote nodes without commenting on them?by jeffa (Bishop) |
on Sep 06, 2005 at 14:06 UTC ( [id://489505]=note: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
"yes, I super searched. I didn't directly find anything which answered what I was asking on, and also that does not tell me what the position of people here today on the isue is. And what's the big deal? If you don't like the thread, don't read." You won't find "answers" ... only complaints. It's the same old song -- someone downvoted my node, i'm going to announce this to the public. And contrary to your belief, when you post something at the Monastery, it becomes part of the Monastery. If i don't like the thread, i will read it anyway. And guess what? I might just use some downvotes. ;) "yes, I have read some posting guidelines. So my title was changed - so what? My original title was broader and allowed the possibility of broader debate, without accusations of going "ot". Are you just seeking ways to find something to pick a hole in, or do you have a point?" I made my point clear. Unless you show that you have taken the time to read some of the rules around here, you are not going to get much sympathy. Your title choice was simply poor, not broader. "my 'children' comment was a direct gesture at the people who responded to the question with exactly the behaviour it was questioning. With the constructive comments that have occurred, I have at least seen some good reasons why what I suggested might not be practical, which is to the good. Had I not made this thread, that would not have happened. And although I can see those points, I also feel satisfied that I have also made some valid points. Which is what debate is supposed to be about - and which matters to me MUCH more than any number stored against my name in here." "At the people who responded to the question with exactly the behaviour it was questioning?" You don't even know who those people are and you still think labeling them as children is a constructive way to gleam why you were downvoted? Secondly, going back to the Super Search question -- you think that by making this thread, good points were made as to what you suggested might not be practicle. Well, if you had properly searched, you would have seen that those reasons were already pointed out. "The whole 'rooting for the team' argument migt have some sense to it if it was not for the fact that sporting (and other) crowds are not exactly known for their ability to arrive at good conclusions through debate and logic ... they only basically care if you are winning. I am much more interested in having good debate than in whether people like/dislike what I say. I would hope that you are too." I am much more interested in learning Perl than debating, but i will debate from time to time. If you plan on debating more than discussing and spreading Perl knowledge, then do prepare yourself for being downvoting without reason more often in the future. 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)
In Section
Perl Monks Discussion
|
|