Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
We don't bite newbies here... much
 
PerlMonks  

RE: Proposed XP System Changes

by Macphisto (Hermit)
on Aug 03, 2000 at 18:42 UTC ( #25979=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Proposed XP System Changes

vroom,
Are you supporting this or are you simply stating what others have requested/suggested?

I like the ideas, and hope they get implented. I'm curious if it will cause much backlash, or it will cause some confusion among most of the monks.

I know a lot of people have expressed their growing concern over getting voted down without explination( I'm one of them, considering my level jumped from scribe, to monk, back to scribe four times in one day ). Many of the chatterbox folk have suggested adding a requirement that a response be given on a -- vote. This would obviously be difficult to implement since many could just enter garbage or demeaning words as their reasons. It would be nice, however to have to have some requirement that a -- be accompanied with the reason why the person thinks you should be voted down. I know this revokes some basic rights we have a perlmonks.org, not the least of which tends to be anonymity, and I'm not sure exactly how you would go about doing keeping fairness and efficiency in hand. I simply wanted to breach the subject.

Good luck with the other changes,
Cardinal Ximinez

Nobody expects the The Spanish Inquisition


Comment on RE: Proposed XP System Changes
RE: RE: Proposed XP System Changes
by vroom (Pope) on Aug 03, 2000 at 18:53 UTC
    I think it works to solve a lot of the current problems. A lot of users in #perlmonks saw room for improvement in the current XP system. I wasn't completely pleased with how XP currently works either and asked them for a proposal to fix it. This is what they came up with.

    Personally, I think it does a good job of addressing the current problems.

    As for giving reasons to users for votes given on nodes one issue is user-interface. I don't want to see drop down menus everywhere or additional text boxes. I think the best thing might be to allow mini-notes to be added to a node that could only be viewed by the author. It would also be interesting to gain other stats on users posts such as accuracy, helpfulness etc... and maybe some in the opposite direction as well. I think the best we can do on this sort of feedback is make it optional.

    vroom | Tim Vroom | vroom@cs.hope.edu

      Very true. And a well thought out response. I don't want to see PM get cluttered as hell either but honestly when I post a question that I'm dying for an answer to, and all I get is a couple of --'s without even one explination it doesn't help me learn anything. I've got no problem losing XP, it's not important to me whatsoever, what is important is peoples input. A lot of times I do get really good input from initiates all the way up to the saints, and I love that, it works great. But I'd rather be told what is wrong with my code/post than save XP. Guess you can't have them all, can you? And I certainly don't want to clutter up the site, with excess garbage.


      Nobody expects the The Spanish Inquisition
      I think it's imperative that such a note system (for explaining votes) be just as anonymous as the voting itself. If not... then the people we're annoy'd with won't post any reasons anyway.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://25979]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others exploiting the Monastery: (5)
As of 2014-09-16 03:14 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My favorite cookbook is:










    Results (155 votes), past polls