RE: (3) Higher level posts (Thesis, not XP overhaul)

[ybiC]

in reply to RE: RE: Higher level posts
in thread Higher level posts

If I understand jjhorner right, I agree wholeheartedly:

Gaining XP by voting (and being voted on) appears to work very well to encourage positive participation.

What may be needed is a mechanism to prevent an intermediate-at-best Perler like myself from advancing to Friar, Bishop or such just by being a reasonably well behaved Monk for a long time. Make me advance in my coding ability if I want to advance as a Monk.

1. XP could still work as it does now.
2. When XP earned to advance level, Monk must author documentation that benefits PM before gaining new level.
3. Alternate methods of demonstrating Perl expertise are also possible.
4. Monk earns no further XP until doc presented and approved by group of high-level Monks.
5. Monk could be pre-emptive by presenting doc before XP earned, but only for the next level.
6. Review process might begin at Monk (5) level.

Having said that, I still have questions or concerns:

• how would the review board be selected?
• how could plaguerism be prevented?
• retroactive or not?

[PipTigger]

There's something to be said for being a reasonably well behaved Monk for a long time... and I don't see how to fairly (or nicely) evaluate coding ability for XP directly. There already is incentive to contribute... with every post, you can get many votes and presumably more points than just those for your daily votes if the content is worthwhile. Put up a little 3 line obfuscated JAPH and you'll get 30+XP. I think any point scheme is bound to have seemingly problemmatic issues but it would take a long time for someone to get to abbot or bishop only by voting... and if they're voting so faithfully, why would they also not feel compelled to contribute to the community they're frequenting? I think the system werks as well as possible as it is.

-PipTigger

p.s. Initiate Nail Removal Immediately!