What is the problem that this is supposed to solve?
in reply to Challenging votes
I'm guessing that there's a scenario that goes something
like: "UserX is
mad at Petdance. UserX votes against a Petdance node,
even though it's an excellent node.
UserX needs to be penalized for voting against it, because
he did it out of spite, rather than for a reason."
Is this the problem we're addressing?
Personally, I don't see it as much of a problem. I certainly
don't want my time at Perlmonks to be buried in administrivia,
and the worst thing that's happened is that my XP has gone
down some. I'm not very concerned about an angry UserX
voting against me, since the rest of my nodes are of such
a high quality. It's a small downward blip. I've had
plenty of nodes voted against inexplicably, but I don't
cry over it.
Now, if the goal is to provide feedback to the writer of
the nodes, THAT'S a heck of an idea. I envision something like
Node score: 9 = 12++, 3--
Note that not everyone (indeed, very few) gave reasons for
their votes, which is what I expect would happen.
++ Nicely done, this is a big help
-- Code is broken
I was dreaming when I wrote this, so sue me if I go too fast.