http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=592905


in reply to Possible changes to Voting/XP

Hmm, I would like to think about this more deeply. The idea of time playing a factor is most intriguing to me. An analogous and perhaps irrational thought that comes to mind is the concept of famous artists who are underappreciated during their lifetimes and die penniless only to have their art recognized as sublime long after it does them any good. Sometimes, while doing a search, I come across a really good discussion on a topic in which I am interested. If anything, a GOOD thing that remains relevant and helpful for a long time, it seems to me, should be rewarded even MORE than when it is new and there is a "buzz" about it, if you will. I do agree however, that downvotes should have less impact as time goes by since that seems like a common MO for spiteful monks, and the shortcomings of a node seem to be picked out and addressed fairly quickly. It's the great nodes that I stumble across weeks or months after they've been created that are kind of "jewels in the rough," if you will, that intrigue me. At the very least, I don't think that a positive vote a year after a node is created should count less than one six hours after it was created.

I'm no expert and this is kind of off-the-cuff, but I really love finding great nodes in super search that address my issue very well, and I feel like just because I didn't see the node when it was new shouldn't mean my positive feeling about the node should be discounted.

Does this make sense or am I perhaps being too nostalgic?

tye, thanks for the hard work, and I enjoy thinking about stuff like this. I know you also think deeply about this and have a strong desire to be fair and honest and it's truly appreciated, at least by me.

I like computer programming because it's like Legos for the mind.