Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
The stupid question is the question not asked
 
PerlMonks  

Please add considerer automatically

by neophyte (Curate)
on Mar 30, 2001 at 14:19 UTC ( #68326=monkdiscuss: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

The recent events in nodes to consider call for some action.
People have been considering nodes anonymously with crude reasons, or no reason at all. I suggest adding the considerer to the reason automatically.
I hope that people will quit unnecessary considering when they know, that everybody will see who it was.

Another problem isn't addressed by this measure:
If someone considers a node saying: "delete, dup", the node is deleted in extremely short time. The short time span suggests that nobody (including myself) checks if that really was a duplicate.
Perhaps we should be a bit more attentive.

neophyte Niederrhein.pm

Comment on Please add considerer automatically
Re: Please add considerer automatically
by arhuman (Vicar) on Mar 30, 2001 at 14:57 UTC
    There's another reason why the 'considerer name' could be handy :
    'Deletion requested by author' reason will be easy to check...

    "Only Bad Coders Badly Code In Perl" (OBC2IP)
(Ovid) Re: Please add considerer automatically
by Ovid (Cardinal) on Mar 30, 2001 at 16:53 UTC
    Case in point: This node is Nodes to consider (as it should be since it's a duplicate of this node. But someone "considered" it anonymously and with no reason. Who the heck would vote to delete that?

    I think you have a great idea and it would certainly help NTC quite a bit.

    Cheers,
    Ovid

    Join the Perlmonks Setiathome Group or just click on the the link and check out our stats.

      To repeat myself and others one more time again (: we should also require a non-blank reason for consideration and should allow a node to be "reconsidered" so someone who notices that a "delete, duplicate" isn't really a duplicate can add a "keep, isn't duplicate" line. This last feature also prevents the "denial of service consideration" which I have used a couple of times (consider a node with a misleading reason and noone can consider it for the right reason).

              - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")
Re: Please add considerer automatically
by Albannach (Prior) on Mar 30, 2001 at 20:06 UTC
    A big ++ on identifying the considerer! (I picture a meeting in which one monk stands and offers a motion, then the rest vote on it).

    On the topic of duplicates, the considerer should always provide a link to the suposed "original" node so that voters can check for themselves. Often "duplicates" aren't exactly the same and a bit of judgement is required to decide which one to keep (e.g. newbies who ignore the preview then re-post to correct formatting). So while we're giving poor idle vroom suggestions, maybe the consider nodelet could have a button (& box?) for "alleged duplicate of node"?

    --
    I'd like to be able to assign to an luser

Re: Please add considerer automatically
by OzzyOsbourne (Chaplain) on Mar 31, 2001 at 00:19 UTC

    Great idea! It would also be good to disallow a post without something in the reason field. I know that I have checked the CONSIDER rather than the OK on at least one occasion.

    -OzzyOsbourne

Re (tilly) 1: Please add considerer automatically
by tilly (Archbishop) on Mar 31, 2001 at 07:20 UTC
    Taking this one step further, there are some considerers that I would like to consider...

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: monkdiscuss [id://68326]
Approved by root
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others romping around the Monastery: (6)
As of 2015-04-25 10:01 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    Who makes your decisions?







    Results (477 votes), past polls