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

Self-actualization considered harmful (no more "self front-paging/approving")

by tye (Cardinal)
on Jun 11, 2002 at 17:53 UTC ( #173591=monkdiscuss: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

Primarilly in an effort to reduce the recurrent moaning and gnashing, the ability to approve or front-page your own nodes has been taken away (from everyone at level 6 and above -- others never had that power in the first place).

If you feel the need to approve or front-page one of your own nodes, then you will have to be content with asking a friend to do it for you. (:

If you feel the need to complain about this change, then please do so in person, preferably not to me, as otherwise it would defeat the primary purpose of this change. :)

But seriously, for a while now I've felt this was an unnecessary temptation. I'd like to give a big "thank you" for a few monks for repeatedly succumbing to this temptation and to many, many more monks for talking about these "lapses". Without your tireless work, I don't think there would have been the consensus of "Just do it already, Tye" that I enjoyed today. (Hmm, I guess that didn't stay very serious for very long, did it?)

Note that this is not meant to criticise the judgement of level 6 and higher monks. I consider it an acknowledgement that anyone can develop a blind spot when it comes to their own writing. (And that some monks expressed that sometimes self-approval is an okay thing when done by a respected monk but that such monks should have no problem finding someone else to do their dirty work them a favor.)

        - tye (but my friends aren't level 6 yet)

Comment on Self-actualization considered harmful (no more "self front-paging/approving")
Re: Self-actualization considered harmful (no more "self front-paging/approving")
by atcroft (Monsignor) on Jun 11, 2002 at 18:20 UTC

    Brother tye, I applaude this move to resolve this issue.

    I consider myself yet but an egg, but it seems that with all the discussions about this that the problem is in different views on what and why something should be front-paged. Perhaps an example of what I am thinking would be in order.

    A few nights ago in the CB, someone came in an asked for someone to front page their posting. The problem was a little difficult, but it seemed their desire was for it to be front-paged so it would get more response, as they seemed (IIRC) to be in a bit of a bind due to the issue they inquired about.

    The thing is, though, that the articles I have went back and looked at regarding the front-page indicate that the front-page should be more a cross-section of what is covered and what the community is, since this is the first encounter someone would have with the Monastery, giving them an opinion of whether to keep coming back or leave and never return.

    In addition, a number of monks have commented that they tend more towards the Newest Nodes section when looking for interesting discussions and problems anyways, so it isn't as if it isn't going to get responded to if it isn't on the front page.

    I know this issue may be somewhat a powder keg at times, it seems, and I again applaude the efforts to resolve the issue.

Re: Self-actualization considered harmful (no more "self front-paging/approving")
by shotgunefx (Parson) on Jun 11, 2002 at 19:22 UTC
    While I agree with removing the ability to frontpage your own node, I think removing the ability to approve it is silly.

    I'm not worried that my nodes won't get approved, I'm fairly certain they will but I think most monks who have at least a level six know enough not to post worthless nodes. It seems extreme IMHO


    update Just a thought, wouldn't a vote on this been appropriate? (Yes, I know this isn't a democracy)

    -Lee

    "To be civilized is to deny one's nature."
      This was discussed among the editors over a couple of days. Some liked the idea very much, while others had no strong opinion but did not object. I count that as a sufficient vote.
      I think removing the ability to approve it is silly

      I really need to disagree with this. I have rarely approved my own nodes (my feeling on that is closely aligned with tye's statment on blind spots), I have never this felt this behaviour was silly or even inconvienent. In the few cases of that I did approve my own nodes I always had another monk (unfortunately it's usually Ovid) I trust (cough) read it before I approved.

      My thinking is: I should be more concerned about the quality of my post (going into posterity) than my convienence of the moment



      grep
      Just me, the boy and these two monks, no questions asked.
        Well I'd have to disagree. In my experience in this community, almost any Perl question, no matter how simple or plain out wrong is almost certainly approved so I'm not sure what this step buys.

        Most monks know by the time the reach the higher levels a bit about what's appropriate. It doesn't keep out trolls because they can still respond to any approved node. The only thing I can see that it does is keep Anonymous Monk from posting flamebait root nodes. And if someone really wants to, the can make an alternate nic that's level(5) or higher pretty quickly so it doesn't stop the XP whores.

        I really don't think it's that big of a deal. I guess I find it a little vexing in principle. I answer questions at least 10 times more than I ask them so I guess it just bugs me that I have to raise my hand before I speak.

        -Lee

        "To be civilized is to deny one's nature."
Re: Self-actualization...
by footpad (Monsignor) on Jun 11, 2002 at 20:47 UTC

    I just want to add, for the record, that this isn't something that tye did entirely on his own. There are a couple of areas where the helper elves can discuss various issues that come up.

    The discussion was nearly unamimous for taking some action, as mistakes have been made in the past (as well as a certain amount of abuse). A couple of voices were raised about perhaps allowing self-approval, but the point about it being fairly easy to find someone else to approve the node was well-taken.

    I would only ask (again) that if you reply to a node and you have access to the Approval nodelet, then please make certain that the root note has been Approved. I'm still seeing a lot of nodes that are not being approved.

    --f

      I wasn't blaming the messenger by any means.

      As far as still seeing a lot of nodes that are not being approved, that's one of my beefs with not allowing self approval.

      It makes more work. As a level 10 monk, I can be trusted to know what nodes are worth approving and what nodes are not, unless they are my own? I don't hit the SOPW page often, usually I go to Newest Nodes, so it's easy to read a node, even answer it without noticing the root node has not been approved. I do make an effort to hit SOPW occasionally and see what needs approving.

      I hate to think that on a weekend or late night, that if I face a "dead in the water" problem, that I might not get help because the few monks logged in are not of a high enough level to see it. (TheDamian was < level 5 not that long ago)

      -Lee

      "To be civilized is to deny one's nature."

        Briefly:

        • It makes more work

          I disagree. It means that everyone has to wait for another experienced monk to revaluate and approve your work.

          If anything, this is precisely what we've asked of folks all along. Simply wait for someone else to verify that you haven't temporarily lost your sanity. Unfortunately, that's not being honored by certain members of out community.

          To my mind, the additional work (if any) greatly offsets the risk of a sneaky troll.

        • As a level 10 monks, I can be trusted...

          No, as a level 10 monk, you are subjected to the same level of peer review as a first time novice. To my mind, that's more democratic because it helps ensure that everyone is treated reasonably fairly.

        • "Dead in the water" problem

          Given the rather large number of international members, it's very unlikely that you won't see a reply within short order. Besides, there are other avenues you can pursue for more immediate response, e.g. the IRC channels, UseNet, even paid support.

          Along the same lines, it's likely that the people that can help you bail yourself out of water know that you can show unapproved content in Newest Nodes by changing a setting in your User Profile. Thus, you will likely not be penalized for not being able to approve your own node.

          And as far as TheDamian goes, well, that may be true. And while I respect his experience and knowledge very, very highly, I doubt he's the only name in the rolls that can answer emergency posts.

          And even if he is, he's not the only one that can approve nodes. Thus, all you have to do is a) make sure you post a reasonable node (by doing your homework first) and b) find someone online that can approve your node for you.

        Your viewpoint was represented in the discussions I referred to. The overall consensus, though, was pretty heavily weighted in favor of removing both settings.

        --f

        As a level 10 monk, I can be trusted to know what nodes are worth approving and what nodes are not, unless they are my own?

        Yes, exactly. Like I said, it is easy to develop a blind spot when it comes to your own writing. I've seen it happen. I've even had high-level monks /msg me asking to unapprove their question shortly after it happens.

        Just a thought, wouldn't a vote on this been appropriate?

        Well, in my experience, a full-blown vote is rarely going to give you a great indication. The results of the vote are highly influenced by extraneous items like the wording of the question (or even the replies). And, frankly, I don't consider this particular issue nearly big enough to warrant such effort.

        If this is an unpopular change, we'll certainly know fairly soon due to this announcement and its replies. And this change isn't something that will be difficult to undo.

        When I first mentioned this idea, I got negative feedback from several people. So I dropped it. Today, I got lots of positive feedback (from multiple people in multiple forums including the chatterbox, editors' wiki, and #perlmonks). I specifically sought out people who had previously been against it and got positive feedback from them as well. So I did call for a limited set of votes.

        Personally, I don't feel that strongly either way on the self-approval issue itself. But I do feel strongly that just biting the bullet and disallowing self-approval will more thoroughly retire the issue than allowing self-approval but not self-frontpaging. I predict that, soon enough, the vast majority of monks will just come to accept that you don't approve your own nodes.

        And I predict that allowing self-approval would result in this issue being discussed over and over again when someone notices that only one of the checkboxes is disabled for their own nodes, that someone has approved their own node of questionable value, etc.

        I might not get help because the few monks logged in are not of a high enough level to see it.

        I'd s/see/approve/. You can't make nodes that low-level monks can't see. Approval mostly makes them easier for infrequent visitors to notice. And even AnonyMonk can see the Chatterbox, so feel free to promote your node there. But I think this is a particularly unlikely scenario, especially these days (and I don't consider developing a blind spot to one's own question to be unlikely). I think footpad addresses this point well so I'll defer further comment.

                - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")
Re: Self-actualization considered harmful (no more "self front-paging/approving")
by monkfish (Pilgrim) on Jun 12, 2002 at 23:29 UTC
    The whole reason I worked to become a friar was to frontpage my own nodes. I have been a friar for less than a month (and not frontpaged any of my nodes) and now my privilege right is being taken away.

    All my posts (the help I gave, and the education I got) have just been a waste. I'm sorry I ever bothered.

    Tye, please consider this a standing request to frontpage all my nodes, even the worthless ones, 'course I'll do the same for you. :)

    Edit: Alert to the humor impared, I called it a right, I commented on learning, I put a smilie face for god's sake

    -monkfish (The Fishy Monk)

      I was going to -- you, but decided to post instead. So in all this time and through all the help you've offered, you haven't made any even remote acquaintances that may recognize your name on the chatterbox and be willing to frontpage your own nodes? You value the ability to frontpage nodes more than your insights to being a good coder, as well as overall a member of a community? And while I'm sure I'll get a few -- of my own, I'll stand up here to tell you that temper tantrum in your last paragraph is childish both for the reaction as well as for targetting the messenger.

      Update: Ack. pack my $foot => my @mouth
      ____________

      Makeshifts last the longest.
        Oh dear. And I was honestly thinking it simply had to be another case of sarcasm gone awry in an ASCII medium.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: monkdiscuss [id://173591]
Approved by paco
Front-paged by paco
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others rifling through the Monastery: (13)
As of 2014-07-31 18:05 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My favorite superfluous repetitious redundant duplicative phrase is:









    Results (250 votes), past polls