Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Problems? Is your data what you think it is?
 
PerlMonks  

Re^3: History now influences voting (judgement)

by ww (Bishop)
on Nov 19, 2007 at 02:03 UTC ( #651563=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^2: History now influences voting (judgement)
in thread History now influences voting

.... Then you can downvote another set of spam in a row and likely lose less than 1 XP for each 3 you downvote.

I quite agree with your changes (++ by the way)) and view downvoting spam, rather than considering it, to be misguided. It may even be sufficiently misguided that it should cost the voter XP.

Nonetheless, the risk of losing XP for what the writer says he views as a community service (even if that notion is, in fact, misguided) may be a disincentive not only to that specific community service, but to any other which might be better-founded, unless we plainly state that "downvoting spam is deprecated. Consider it, instead."

Update (ca 21:35 GMT): Gentle reader: my observations were colored by a misconception, corrected in tye's Re^6: History now influences voting (reaps), below. It may be below the level of replies you usually read, but if anything I remarked above resonates, please see tye's clarification.


Comment on Re^3: History now influences voting (judgement)
Re^4: History now influences voting (reaps)
by tye (Cardinal) on Nov 19, 2007 at 02:07 UTC

    Well, for a spam to be reaped, it needs to have a reputation < 0, so somebody needs to downvote it. I usually downvote a node before voting "reap". -5 for an accidental duplicate costs just enough XP (likely 1 or 2) to make one slightly more careful next time. :)

    - tye        

      (colors darkly!) I guess I misunderstood the requirement for - - votes as a guideline whose applicability was subject to a janitor's discretion.

      Still, that raises a question, in my feeble brain: NTC says:

      Janitors only honor a consideration when it is consistent with site policy and doesn't conflict with their own judgement, regardless of how many 'edit' votes it has. When the appropriateness of a consideration is less clear, patience is preferred over haste.

      ...which led this non-janitor to believe janitors have some discretion about the rule you cite.

      And if I misunderstood the rule, does that not mean the (potential) loss of XP for an actual service is -- in your earlier (and well-considered) phrase, "noise that should be avoided?"

        janitors can't reap (they can vote for or against reaping just like anybody else of sufficient level). So, no, their judgement doesn't have any special impact on the rules that control when a node is reaped. For reaping, the judgement comes into play when gods decide whether to unreap nodes that got reaped against site policy.

        - tye        

Re^4: History now influences voting (judgement)
by dwu (Monk) on Nov 19, 2007 at 03:41 UTC

    I quite agree with your changes (++ by the way)) and view downvoting spam, rather than considering it, to be misguided.

    Surely it doesn't take being level 9 and above to consider spam - and below that, all a well-intentioned PMer can do is downvote.

    Edit: Thanks to planetscape for the pointer at typoing "downvote"! Oops.


    dwu

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://651563]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others lurking in the Monastery: (16)
As of 2014-08-01 14:56 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    Who would be the most fun to work for?















    Results (25 votes), past polls