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

Re^2: PM Leveling Guide.

by LanX (Archbishop)
on Mar 05, 2015 at 02:03 UTC ( #1118819=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: PM Leveling Guide.
in thread PM Leveling Guide.

> As long as you don't write total nonsense, it doesn't matter what quality your answers are, because people will upvote moderately good answers the same as very goos answers. There are no double or triple upvotes.

Exactly this lack of double or triple upvotes makes the system favoring mediocre posts.

In the first 4 years here I restricted my votes to nodes I considered excellent. The system punished me b/c I didn't exhaust my quota.

But today even after I started to upvote even moderately good answers I mostly finish the day with 20 votes left. I know that others (e.g. choroba) have similar problems.

I would love to have the opportunity to give 5 upvotes for excellent elaborated posts even if I lost XP in exchange.

Cheers Rolf
(addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :)

PS: Je suis Charlie!

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: PM Leveling Guide.
by BrowserUk (Pope) on Mar 05, 2015 at 03:28 UTC
    The system punished me b/c I didn't exhaust my quota.

    Hm. I seriously doubt there has been a single day when I have exhausted all votes in 7/8/9/10 years. Most days I vote 3 or 4 times at most. (I can't prove that; but a God could verify it if they chose to.)

    I guess I've been doing it wrong all these years.


    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". I'm with torvalds on this
    In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Agile (and TDD) debunked
Re^3: PM Leveling Guide.
by cheako (Beadle) on Mar 05, 2015 at 04:16 UTC

    There must have been simply a tone of good posts 4 years ago, going back to the beginning of PM. As I indicate in my guide on leveling look for places worthy of being voted. Today I'm convinced you could spend a lifetime reading PM and still not have read everything.

    The fortunes file edition:
    I'm convinced you could spend a lifetime reading PerlMonks and still not have read "all the documentation." -- Mike Mestnik

      Come on, at the time of writing your comment, there were only 1118829 nodes on PM, including yours. That is manageable. Come on, show more effort!

        Have I read all the posts on PM? I seriously doubt it. If I had, would I remember them all? I seriously doubt it. Is there a point to this ramble? I seriously ... don't remember :(


        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". I'm with torvalds on this
        In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Agile (and TDD) debunked
Re^3: PM Leveling Guide.
by chacham (Prior) on Mar 06, 2015 at 00:28 UTC

    I would love to have the opportunity to give 5 upvotes for excellent elaborated posts even if I lost XP in exchange.

    The problem is downvotes. For example, some people hate certain users, for example, sundialsvc4, and he gets modded down multiple times by the same user via proxy accounts. I've gotten it too, where it was obvious (specifically on two, maaaybe three occasions) that the same user modded me down three times. If mutiple downvotes were allowed, this malicious user, and others like him, would trounce the people they don't like.

    Even if restricted to upvotes, there is an issue. The regulars like to upvote each other, perhaps unconsciously, and thus would be more likely to double upvote each other, making PM high ranked comments a mostly exclusive club of mutual back scratchers. That would be a tragedy.

    Unless you think this comes up really often, i would suggest simply posting a "I really liked that post" post.

      and he gets modded down multiple times by the same user via proxy accounts. I've gotten it too, where it was obvious (specifically on two, maaaybe three occasions) that the same user modded me down three times.

      "Nothing's obvious unless you are overlooking something." I've personally verified that it wasn't happening to the person you called out. Narrow down the time frame for me and I'll probably verify that it hasn't happened to you, either.

      Yes, people have often jumped to this conclusion. So far, they have been wrong every time. But it is human nature to form such conclusions. Some examples: 590525, 652529, 974370.

      - tye        

        Tye you are amazing. :) I will respond further in private messaging.

      Downvoted. I have no sock-puppets so its just the one. You make an accusation without proof based on emotional response and you cite as evidence a monk who has to my knowledge never once answered a technical question with code correctly in seven years, frequently flogs horses, constantly conflates Perl Monks social mores with dungheaps like HuffPo, and gives dangerous, insecure advice under the guise of expertise informed by decades of experience. I began to nearly always downvote this monk in the last few months because the content of posts is usually either of no or negative technical merit and and the social contributions are generally either confused or misplaced or exactly opposed to my compass. I was somewhat shocked recently to see a genuine contribution here that was worth an upvote: Re^2: access array of values without a loop.

        I don't know if it counts as an accusation when i did not name the user. Sundial is an excellent example because he gets voted down so often. I'm not sure the regulars see his posts objectively anymore.

      yes downvotes should be excluded. I don't see this "scratching" problem, but who knows.

      > and he gets modded down multiple times by the same user via proxy accounts.

      "Modded down" means voted down?

      How do you want to know about these sockpuppets?

      I know a bunch of real people here who are rather critical about the monk you mentioned, me included. I doubt sockpuppets are needed.

      Creating efficient sockpuppets which are not discovered by a database lookup is IMHO quite difficult.

      UPDATE

      I'd try to restrict the multiple upvotes to 10% of ones quota. Like this you'll need at least 20 votes (Chaplain) before being able to.

      Cheers Rolf
      (addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :)

      PS: Je suis Charlie!

      ) and IIRC did the admins assure more than once that there is no trace in the DB for such a sockpuppet downvote farm.

        "Modded down" means voted down?

        Yes. Oh my. Years later, i am still using Slashdot lingo. :)

        How do you want to know about these sockpuppets?

        I do not "know," but it is a strong feeling. It is based on proximity of their attitude towards a person or post and the time between the downvotes. There are other hints when some people post anonymously, but their wording style gives them away. On a related note, someone, from time to time, follows my posts and downvotes everything i post up to 3 times. He does it in bursts. The best part is, i love it that someone cares. :)

        Creating efficient sockpuppets which are not discovered by a database lookup is IMHO quite difficult.

        Wouldn't that depend on how many servers you have.

        I'd try to restrict the multiple upvotes to 10% of ones quota. Like this you'll need at least 20 votes (Chaplain) before being able to.

        I don't see this "scratching" problem, but who knows.

        You can do a simple test, as you are well known and liked. Create a new account. Post something silly only mildly relevant in SoPW (or how it can be done in another language or environment.) Wait a few days. Post nearly the same comment under your own account. (Or reverse the order.) Chances are, under your own name you will be voted up and cause a chain of other responses of a similar grain.

      "and he gets modded down multiple times by the same user via proxy accounts"

      Interesting, do you have any evidence to back up this accusation?

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1118819]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others scrutinizing the Monastery: (11)
As of 2020-02-18 16:07 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    What numbers are you going to focus on primarily in 2020?










    Results (76 votes). Check out past polls.

    Notices?