Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
XP is just a number
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Re: Front Page with Negative Rep..

by BazB (Priest)
on May 17, 2002 at 08:03 UTC ( #167224=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: Front Page with Negative Rep..
in thread Front Page with Negative Rep..

As the monk that considered that node with the rather terse reason of "idiotic", I'd like to at least explain. I'm also surprised that I didn't get some sort of /msg.

I'm very surprised that a non-specific question "How do I use Perl?" was not considered before even I got to it. If it was such a great node, it wouldn't have been reaped - plenty other monks would vote "keep" and/or ++ the node.

I'm not trying to make a big thing of it - it just looked like a troll.

If the question had been "How do I use Perl to do $foo", or "How do I run the perl interpreter when I want to achieve $bar", I probably would have replied to the node, rather than put it up for consideration.

I find it rather insulting that my attitude is considered repugnant - I might not be the most experienced of Monks, but I at least expected my previous contributions would show that's not how I normally behave.

Update: Sigh. More personality voting now?


Comment on Re: Re: Front Page with Negative Rep..
Re: Re: Re: Front Page with Negative Rep..
by chromatic (Archbishop) on May 17, 2002 at 14:45 UTC
    Thank you for the explanation: I can see your logic. Perhaps I'd make a difference between dumb but potentially honest questions and malicious questions. Examples: How do I run a Perl program in my browser?

    from vr00m: how do u write a web site, b!0Tch3zzzzzzzzz!! suck it down Unfortunately, they're not always that obvious.

    In my opinion, dumb questions don't deserve reaping. Questions from a poster who may not have read the manual don't deserve reaping. Questions that may potentially be homework don't deserve reaping. Questions that produce good discussion don't deserve reaping.

    Granted, in this case several other people agreed with the delete vote, but I suspect there's less of a mental hurdle needed to decide to reap a node after it's already been considered.

      In my opinion, dumb questions don't deserve reaping. Questions from a poster who may not have read the manual don't deserve reaping. Questions that may potentially be homework don't deserve reaping. Questions that produce good discussion don't deserve reaping.

      Absulutely 100% right. I'm of the no-such-thing-as-a-dumb-question school. God knows I've asked enough dumb questions in my life. Even if the original poster was being facetious, what could be more relevant than a thread on 'What is Perl, where can I get it, and how do I write my first script?' ?.

      IMHO there's some very itchy trigger fingers around. If some monks are annoyed by basic questions, why can't they just ignore them? Perhaps we could raise the bar on the ratio of votes needed for deletion.

      andy.

Re (3): Front Page with Negative Rep..
by VSarkiss (Monsignor) on May 17, 2002 at 15:27 UTC

    Thanks for the calm and clear reply, BazB. I do realize you've been around the monastery a while, but I didn't refer to you specifically in my note (I knew you'd put it on NTC) because I didn't think it was appropriate to single you out. Frankly, I wrote that note when I was angry, which I tell people not to do. I apologize for insulting you. That wasn't my intent.

    What I did intend is to tell everyone that I think consideration is being abused. I think people are using the power to perpetuate elitism, rather than to get rid of abusive nodes. Some cases are grayer than others, but I agree with chromatic and kudra: it's better to err on the side of caution.

    In any case, the community has acted. Let's move on.

(tye)Re2: Front Page with Negative Rep..
by tye (Cardinal) on May 17, 2002 at 16:24 UTC

    There were actually 14 "keep" votes. This should mean that it couldn't have been automatically reaped. I asked a few gods if they had reaped the node by hand and was not surprised to hear only "no" responses. There still may be a member of gods that did the reaping that I didn't talk with. Or there might be a security problem that allowed a non-god to reap the node. Or there might be a bug that caused the auto-reaping to happen despite the "keep" votes.

    But my best guess is that one of the gods reaped the node by accident. In any case, it will be unreaped soon (no, I won't go into the details of why I can't just unreap it now).

    And I'll keep my eyes open for evidence of the other possible explanations.

            - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")
      While at it, what exactly are the criteria for auto-reaping (like ratio between keep/delete), and what other rules are there, programatically enforced or not, for reaping/editing?

      Apparently, gods can do pretty much what they please with a node, which is ok - they are trusted with this power for a reason, I'm sure. :) But I am just curious as to what things happen automatically, and when, or when for instance editors are allowed to do this or that?

      Unless that is on a need-to-know-basis as the cool guys in sunglasses and dark costumes always say on film... ;-)


      You have moved into a dark place.
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.

        When a fifth or later "delete" vote is cast, if the node has a negative reputation and fewer than 2 "keep" votes, then it is reaped.

                - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://167224]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others studying the Monastery: (18)
As of 2014-11-21 18:05 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My preferred Perl binaries come from:














    Results (114 votes), past polls