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

Re: We should elminate: Anonymous, and DOWN-voting

by TJPride (Pilgrim)
on Dec 03, 2011 at 22:47 UTC ( #941581=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to We should elminate: Anonymous, and DOWN-voting

I agree that nobody should be able to post without getting an account first. If you care -that- little about getting an answer, you're probably going to make a lazy post and waste our time. I've already seem some examples of this in just the past couple weeks. Not that registered users are necessarily perfect either, mind you.

As for downvoting, this is entirely necessary. Some people post horribly bad code, or troll, or whatever, and these people deserve to be downvoted to tell them they're doing something wrong. I rarely downvote people myself, but when I do, it's well-deserved. Given, this can again be abused by regular users - the account I had years ago was being automatically downvoted every day by one user's entire supply of votes, and the site admins wouldn't tell me who it was or do anything about it - but one would hope that if people doing nothing but downvote becomes a widespread problem, the admins will do something about it. It would be much worse to NOT allow downvoting and promote useless trash posts.

  • Comment on Re: We should elminate: Anonymous, and DOWN-voting

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: We should elminate: Anonymous, and DOWN-voting
by Anonymous Monk on Dec 04, 2011 at 10:18 UTC

      It's called "Apophenia"

      Sometimes however there really is a pattern.

      I would get a large number of downvotes every single day, and they were being systematically applied to all my posts. In addition, one of the mods checked into it and verified that I was in fact being systematically downvoted, he just wouldn't give me the person's name or do anything about it. It wasn't paranoia, I know a systematic attack when I see it.

      I'm not an XP whore and don't care -that- much about XP, but it's the principle of the thing - people shouldn't be allowed to abuse the site or the users on it.

        The fact that each Monk only has a limited supply of votes and that each of your nodes can only be downvoted once by each Monk will limit the damage that can be done. It would take a concerted attack by a cabal of evil Monks to do some real damage.


        A program should be light and agile, its subroutines connected like a string of pearls. The spirit and intent of the program should be retained throughout. There should be neither too little or too much, neither needless loops nor useless variables, neither lack of structure nor overwhelming rigidity." - The Tao of Programming, 4.1 - Geoffrey James

Re^2: We should elminate: Anonymous, and DOWN-voting
by Xiong (Hermit) on Dec 04, 2011 at 04:20 UTC

    Yes; but that's the point. If the node is written by Anonymous Monk then you can downvote it without even reading it, if you so choose. You don't even have to think about whether you like the poster or if he's done better at another time. You just click -- and it's Problem Solved.

    If nobody could post anonymously, then the same people would continue to lazy-post... but I at least would have to think twice before downvoting, perhaps even give the post the courtesy of a read. That would really waste our time.

    Feste: Misprison in the highest degree. Lady, cucullus non facit monachum. That's as much to say as, I wear not motley in my brain....
      If down-voting entailed a risk, people would not be so quick to judge.
        If your goal is to have people not judge quickly, shouldn't the same risk be entailed to *any* vote, whether it's a down-vote or an up-vote?

        How about this: all votes you make are public. Anyone can challenge your vote in the 24 hours following your vote. Once your vote has been challenged, you got 24 hours to write down the motivation behind it. People get to vote on that. If that doesn't attract enough up votes more than it has down votes, you lose. The first time you lose, you lose all your XP (and become leve 1 again). The second time you lose, you lose your posting rights for a year. The third time, Vroom comes over, pulls out your nails, kills your dog, sets your house on fire, slashes the tires from your truck, and sells your kids into slavery.

        That ought to stop voting. So no more down votes.

        If down-voting entailed a risk, people would not be so quick to judge.

        Sure, except down-voting already does entails a risk

Re^2: We should elminate: Anonymous, and DOWN-voting
by Anonymous Monk on Dec 04, 2011 at 00:44 UTC
    was being automatically downvoted every day by one user's entire supply of votes

    You've just hit the nail straight on the head; that is the deepest flaw in anonymous consequence free down-voting theory, it empowers and enables the typical narcissistic serial bully and feeds his psychological need at the expense of his victim. If said victim is not in the favour of the gods for whatever reason then there is nothing he/she can do about it, and complaining merely serves to attract more of the same behaviour from others.

      ... said a typical narcissistic serial bully.

      This thread should not have been started or at least it should not have been started now while the site is still frequented by You-know-who whose petty ego has turned this thread into a flamefest already.

      Enoch was right!
      Enjoy the last years of Rome.

        Hehe I'm "You-Know-Who" now am I... ROFL!!!

        Why shouldn't the thread of been started, is your position so weak, and such a house of cards that it cannot stand up to being debated?

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://941581]
and all is quiet...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others perusing the Monastery: (1)
As of 2018-05-27 23:54 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?