http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=9792

If something is pretty cool or amusing, we give it a vote++ without an explanation, which is OK.

=Flame on

Unfortunately, some monks vote-- without the benefit of an explanation. FWIW, I have been hit with a couple of these, but that's not my motiviation, as this does not further perl, perl development, nor the author's knowledge of why his/her writeup "sucked."

Perhaps a general rule of thumb would be that if you feel the need to vote--, give an explanation (i.e., doesn't compile, "I'd rather take a poke in the eye with a sharp stick than look at your code," etc.).

Please see RE: RE: This, too, was wasted on my wife. for a pithier version of this.

=Flame off