|Perl Monk, Perl Meditation|
I can freely accept that the only apparent response to my posting was 30 (so far...) downvotes.
That pretty well sums up why this place (and other sites; but that is their problem) need downvotes. A few more statistics.
Which could only be read as a small but consistently positive support for your proposal.
Hence, a notional, small positive support turns into an overwhelming 82.7% rejection of your proposal, on the basis of the response to your posts alone.
On the basis of pro .v. anti posts in the thread, it is nearer 95% anti your proposal.
And on the basis of all the votes cast in the thread for posts that vaguely support you; versus those very clearly against, it is closer to 99%.
The disenfranchisement of the ability to record an active rejection -- in favor of passive acceptance -- would place the monastery into a reality distortion field, leading to the same outcome as "a few good men doing nothing".
With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.