Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
go ahead... be a heretic
 
PerlMonks  

An Anonymous Vote

by lzcd (Pilgrim)
on Jan 18, 2001 at 08:00 UTC ( #52688=monkdiscuss: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

I know this could be judged as somewhat akin to complaining about the texture of the left index fingernail on Michaelangelo’s David... ...but I thought I might anyway:

Is there any profound reason for having a voting option on nodes submitted by anonymous monks?

Outside of the possibility of the node appearing in either the Best or Worst Node lists, most monastery residents are unlikely see much difference between a Anonymous Monks node at +25 or –25.

Instead of this waste of votes I humbly put forward the following options:

A – We kill the vote option on nodes posted by Anonymous Monks
B – The votes spent on such a node go towards a charitable cause.

With the latter option, the votes could be used for all sorts of interesting things. A daily random act of small blessing? A fund for under priviledged monks? A prize for completing quests and awards?

Maybe we could organise it so that we get the best of both worlds ie. A vote that gets donated but still shows up in the node for statistical things such as thresholds etc.

Thank you for your brain cramp time.

Comment on An Anonymous Vote
Re: An Anonymous Vote
by myocom (Deacon) on Jan 18, 2001 at 08:06 UTC

    This has been discussed before (notably here). The gist was basically that you should be voting based on the quality of the post, not based on who wrote it.

    Having said that, though, I'll admit I don't bother voting ++ or -- for postings by our anonymous friends. I rarely see anything worth voting up, and for those postings I'd normally --, I don't bother once I see who posted it...I'd rather save my vote for someone who deserves a ++.

      While I recognise the need to vote for the subject and not the sender, it seems a little silly in this case as the sender never gets to see the voting feedback.

      The only other alternative is to make the 'particular nodes in question's reputation known to all, irrespective of voting, but this raises more ugly bits than it solves IMHO.
Re: An Anonymous Vote
by turnstep (Parson) on Jan 18, 2001 at 08:14 UTC

    I don't see the votes as a waste. A good post, even if by an AM, should get voted up and recognized as something good, while a bad post should be downgraded just like anyone else. The total XP for the Anonymous Monk will always be screwy, but so what? Each node should be voted on by its merits alone, not on who posted it.

      I'm not in serious doubt of the value of a node vote (irrespective of the sender).

      I guess I just get the niggling feeling that votes for AM nodes could be put to a better use.
      There's also a completely unfounded suspicion on my part that suggests that a lot of monks avoid voting on AM posts for the same (however illogical) reason.

        I see the primary purpose of votes as a way to moderate individual posts as to their quality. The fact that the owner of the post has a chance of being "moderated" also is a side effect, IMO.

Re (tilly) 1: An Anonymous Vote
by tilly (Archbishop) on Jan 18, 2001 at 08:35 UTC
    I am with turnstep. I vote for the post, not the person. I routinely vote for good AM posts.
Re: An Anonymous Vote
by Falkkin (Chaplain) on Jan 18, 2001 at 09:13 UTC
    Voting ++ or -- on an anonymous post isn't merely throwing away your vote. It does affect the value of $NORM, which is used to calculate the probability of gaining/losing XP per vote, as described in the Voting/Experience System.
Re: An Anonymous Vote
by lzcd (Pilgrim) on Jan 18, 2001 at 09:16 UTC
    I'm still hoping will take up option B and run with it awhile so my susggestion doesn't look like a complete loss. <g>
Re: An Anonymous Vote
by chromatic (Archbishop) on Jan 18, 2001 at 10:41 UTC
    Certain display preferences available in user settings order the writeups under a top-level node by their reputation, not their timestamp.

    It's rare but possible that an anonymous monk reply deserves a higher ranking than a credited post.

Re: An Anonymous Vote
by PsychoSpunk (Hermit) on Jan 18, 2001 at 11:00 UTC
    lczd, I'm sure by now you're familiar with the famous stats page of jcwren. If not, go back a node in Discussion.

    Have you ever noticed how many points vroom has managed to accrue? Have you ever looked at the XP of our lowest monk, bravismore? These are the bit buckets for ++ and -- on Anonymous Monks respectively.

    ALL HAIL BRAK!!!

Re: An Anonymous Vote
by extremely (Priest) on Jan 19, 2001 at 05:20 UTC
    I vote root nodes up for asking a good question that garners lots of good discussion or asking a good question that gets one good, generally applicable answer. Regardless of poster, that is how I deal with em. Answer nodes get judged more harshly. Sometimes it is more important to help make sure the best answer bubbles up than reward the early posters who got it right but didn't put real heart into answering it permanently. Also, I tend to blow a vote or two on things I find really funny, since I try and encourage that. =)

    --
    $you = new YOU;
    honk() if $you->love(perl)

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: monkdiscuss [id://52688]
Approved by root
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others meditating upon the Monastery: (5)
As of 2014-08-30 23:22 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    The best computer themed movie is:











    Results (294 votes), past polls