Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
P is for Practical

XP for Consideration

by choroba (Bishop)
on Oct 19, 2011 at 09:03 UTC ( #932330=monkdiscuss: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

Do you think it would be good to dribble out XP for those who Consider? I can imagine like 5% chance of +1 XP per consideration. It is a tedious work, but the community profits from it, so a bit more motivation might help.
I hope I do not sound too greedy.
Update: Originally, I meant voting in ntc by the word "Consider", not considering a node itself.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: XP for Consideration
by davies (Parson) on Oct 19, 2011 at 09:35 UTC

    I'd be a little reluctant to award XP for the actual consideration, but I agree on the idea for voting on considered nodes. Since one can vote on a node one has put up for consideration, this amounts to pretty much the same thing for the considerer. However, it does not give an incentive for hasty or over-enthusiastic consideration, while it does provide a bonus for hasty reaping of spam nodes.


    John Davies

Re: XP for Consideration
by Anonymous Monk on Oct 19, 2011 at 09:38 UTC

    Would this scheme penalize for a bad consideration ? (keep votes )

    I propose, that if, by the time you earn the privilege/power of consideration, you should be sufficiently addicted to perlmonks so as to not need any additional motivation :)

Re: XP for Consideration
by pvaldes (Chaplain) on Oct 19, 2011 at 09:25 UTC
    Why not? seems a good idea to me...

      As davies points out it's actually not such a hot idea because it would encourage hasty consideration. The idea of XP for consideration votes however seems somewhat better, although haste there is not a good thing either, but probably generally less damaging (think about a hasty reap consideration and voting).

      True laziness is hard work
Re: XP for Consideration
by Perlbotics (Chancellor) on Oct 19, 2011 at 21:47 UTC

    I share the concerns already stated by davies and GrandFather.

    Along the consideration-process - consider / vote / edit, the most work seems to be editing a node by a janitor. So in my opinion - if something deserves a kind of gratification by giving XP (probability and necessity to be defined) - it should be for actually cleaning up the mess, rather than for spotting it.

Re: XP for Consideration
by Your Mother (Chancellor) on Oct 21, 2011 at 14:23 UTC

    The objections boil down to: XP for interaction will lead to bad interaction. I hope you can see the problem. If the point is valid, we should consider removing XP++ for all actions unless they are reviewed by a committee of sufficiently enlightened monks to ensure the votes are not hasty, punitive, wrong-headed, blah, blah, blah, bonk, bonk on the head.

    XP is mostly a measure of participation. There's no exceptional reason to bar this form of participation from the tally; Gods willing.

      Five people desperate for more XP and faster decide to vote up the same node. The consequence? A node gets a few extra reputation points. If they get too desperate, what happens? They run out of votes. So, they likely actually apply the votes they have to the better of the nodes they run into anyway, but maybe not. So the down side is trivial and even with the wrongly motivated, there may be no down side at all.

      Five people desperate for more XP faster consider a node with reason "spam" (because they are sick of seeing this (newbie|windows|moose|...) whining being spammed all over the place) and vote "reap". The consequence? A node gets reaped. If they get too desperate, what happens? They don't run out of tokens for considering nodes nor for voting on considerations.

      Just "XP for consideration" is a horrible idea. No, I don't see that happening any time.

      No, I don't think we should have a limited number of tokens per day that one can apply to considering a node or voting on a consideration. Even if we did that to try to match the XP motivation for voting, I don't think the results would be good. At least not if it is mixed in with the XP system. A parallel but separate (and different in several ways) system of "start slow with consideration" that fairly quickly moves to "unlimited" could have value (but still presents problems).

      The primary evil I've found with consideration is lack of care and contemplation. Motivating "more" is not that useful of a goal with consideration.

      I've kicked around a feedback mechanism for consideration that relies on rewarding "good" consideration and punishing "bad" consideration. The punishment would be a temporary suspension on one's ability to consider nodes / vote on considerations. The determination of "good" vs "bad" would be by the community. If you consider a node for "edit", then "keep" votes would count against you, for example.

      But I'm seeing fewer problems with consideration already. It appears to have worked to some extent to put emphasis on things like "don't consider the small stuff", "don't consider without a specific action and a strong justification / motivation because the person considering the node has to do the hard work; don't float trial balloons and expect the voters to do the hard work of actually making a decision before clicking one button", "seeing a consideration reason in NTC often means it was a /bad/ reason", "considerations automatically expire".

      So the determination I made long ago of "an effective system is too much work to implement for the benefit it would provide" is even more true now.

      A system to encourage paying attention to what the community wants might have value. But I think the current "the motivation for doing consideration work is not personal gain" is still working pretty well. And the considerable work to revamp in a way that won't be detrimental makes it far below several other much higher priorities.

      - tye        

Re: XP for Consideration
by Argel (Prior) on Oct 19, 2011 at 22:29 UTC
    Consideration is a waste of time, since the most useful part -- voting to edit a node in some way, is the form of consideration least acted upon. It's mainly useful for reaping at this point. I used to hit Nodes to Consider religiously until someone pointed out the above.

    So, people will either be voting on an edit that will likely never occur or voting on whether to reap a post or not. Both are subject to abuse and both present conflicts of interest.

    What we really need is a larger group of editors that will actually act upon the edit considerations. And if that did occur then I do not think we would need to offer XP as an incentives to vote.

    Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks
    My deviantART gallery

      Over time policy regarding the edits Janitors perform has changed. Currently the policy is much toward least intervention and, in particular, not editing node content for stylistic reasons. The group of editors is large enough.

      I often consider nodes for "code tags" and related mark up issues without any expectation that the Janitors will add code tags (except in the case of Anonymous Monk posts). I do this as a heads up to other monks that there is a formatting problem with the node, but the OP has been informed and a reply to the OP's node to that effect is not required. This seems to be much too subtle for many monks to grasp however, sigh.

      True laziness is hard work
        That could be. My impression on the subject is probably a few years out of date. Regardless, it does not change much. OP deletes the OP and we consider it for editing to have it restored -- not likely to happen, etc. So, Considering is most useful for dealing with spam. So I don't hit Nodes to Consider that much anymore. And getting back to the OP's suggestion, what are we offering incentives for? Spam will be quickly considered anyway and anything else may or may not be acted upon. From that viewpoint, it looks like a system ripe for abuse.

        Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks
        My deviantART gallery

        The group of editors is large enough.

        Reallly? There are 14 janitors, at least 5 haven't visited in over a month, at least 2 are puling double duty as gods

Re: XP for Consideration
by Argel (Prior) on Oct 21, 2011 at 01:18 UTC
    So the consensus is that XP is the wrong way to go. What about something different, like a chance to gain an extra node rep vote for that day?

    Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks
    My deviantART gallery

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: monkdiscuss [id://932330]
Approved by Arunbear
and all is quiet...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others meditating upon the Monastery: (4)
As of 2018-01-22 04:40 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    How did you see in the new year?

    Results (231 votes). Check out past polls.