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

Re: An Anonymous Vote

by myocom (Deacon)
on Jan 18, 2001 at 08:06 UTC ( #52689=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to An Anonymous Vote

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 ++.


Comment on Re: An Anonymous Vote
Re: Re: An Anonymous Vote
by lzcd (Pilgrim) on Jan 18, 2001 at 08:11 UTC
    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.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://52689]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chanting in the Monastery: (11)
As of 2014-09-02 12:33 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My favorite cookbook is:










    Results (22 votes), past polls