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

Re: RFC: Emulating the monastery voting system

by ww (Archbishop)
on Sep 11, 2015 at 21:34 UTC ( #1141720=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to RFC: Emulating the monastery voting system

Looks like you're having fun.

But how do you plan to implement a designated 'butt of the downvotes' and will you be creating anonymous users to cast actual votes against that downvote-butt?>


If you didn't program your executable by toggling in binary, it wasn't really programming!

check Ln42!

  • Comment on Re: RFC: Emulating the monastery voting system

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: RFC: Emulating the monastery voting system
by biohisham (Priest) on Sep 12, 2015 at 08:38 UTC

    Oh yeah, I am having heaps of fun and a sense of purpose. Similar to what I feel when I first joined the Monastery as a Perl rookie. The website is about researchers and mentoring of junior students through a QA like forum, imparting them with soft skills, communication skills and networking: effectively making use of the collective wisdom of all members. Anonymous users should not be given a lot of freedom on what they can do around particularly with regard to voting. Voting will be a privilege given to registered members only. That way I can avoid encouraging malicious downvoting.

    Regarding the 'butt of the downvotes'; I don't think I fully understand you there. If you mean by that my idea of calculating reputation loss based on the average downvotes for the past week, my assumption is that the website users won't be giving a lot of downvotes therefore the average will be quite low and in that case it will be quickly surpassed by the downvotes that one node may receive, resulting in over-penalizing the OP. So I'd probably avoid that form of cruelty altogether.

    Something or the other, a monk since 2009

        Ahem ... maybe not one of my better posts ... but, nevertheless, a pretty long-standing rejoinder to the notion that “there will not be a significant number of down-votes.”   This is not the case, and it therefore should enter into your plans for your system.

        Within ten minutes of the posting of almost any comment bearing my name, I will see Reputation -n, where n varies between 1 and 7.   (This post, of course, will undoubtedly garner a higher count.)   Over the course of the days that follow, the reputation-tally will usually turn slightly positive.

        A simple Google search on the term downvote AND forum is actually quite interesting.   There is a lot of human psychology at play here, and if there’s one thing that the Internet cultural experience has taught us, it is that human beings are far more competitive ... and hurt-able ... than they care to admit.   Most people would not put up with the things that I choose to.   Your voting strategy will have a subtle yet profound impact on the profitability culture of your site, and you should consider it carefully.   (Many people would never dream of putting up with the things that I do, for any length of time at all.)

        I remain persuaded that your forum need only have an easy link:   “Did you find this post helpful?”   And then, to include a minimum upvote-count as part of the available search criteria.   When searching for relevant content, I frankly don’t care how many people pissed in a person’s campfire:   I want to know how many other people found it useful.   I do not want the numbers to be totaled or otherwise mixed, and I do want the ability to be able to filter by that (positive-only) number.

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1141720]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chilling in the Monastery: (6)
As of 2019-11-15 22:59 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    Strict and warnings: which comes first?

    Results (85 votes). Check out past polls.