Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Syntactic Confectionery Delight
 
PerlMonks  

Re^5: RFC: Emulating the monastery voting system

by Your Mother (Bishop)
on Sep 25, 2015 at 12:25 UTC ( #1143011=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^4: RFC: Emulating the monastery voting system
in thread RFC: Emulating the monastery voting system

I could tap-dance around it but we're past that. You are completely wrong. All I read when shopping is the bad reviews; to see if any hold water. Good reviews are non-sense, just like upvotes from strangers. There are many persons who *like* kęstur hįkarl. There are Bronies and Juggalos. There are legions of fans of music so stupid, awful, and moronic it boggles anyone who takes music seriously. A five star review is tripe and it might have been paid for to boot. 10,000 Likes for yellowcake is what got Iraq trashed. A system built without a means of dissenting feedback is a system for propaganda and mutual masturbation.

Your posts have been straying back into positive territory lately because you've been posting more sensible answers. It's not bad stars, it's a reflection of what you put into this place.

  • Comment on Re^5: RFC: Emulating the monastery voting system

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: RFC: Emulating the monastery voting system
by Anonymous Monk on Sep 25, 2015 at 13:20 UTC

    The signal-to-noise ratio is better in the 2-star reviews.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1143011]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others browsing the Monastery: (9)
As of 2019-12-06 11:20 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    Strict and warnings: which comes first?



    Results (154 votes). Check out past polls.

    Notices?