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

Re^5: Messaging the result of a consideration

by jdporter (Canon)
on May 25, 2017 at 18:05 UTC ( #1191234=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^4: Messaging the result of a consideration
in thread Messaging the result of a consideration

How about this: Leave everything about reaping exactly as it is, except -- if the vote being cast would be the one that triggers reapage, and the user casting it is a janitor, then make the number of 'keep' votes necessary to inhibit reaping higher, like 4 or 6, instead of the normal 2.

The effect would be that a janitor can cause the reaping of a node even if the consideration has enough keeps (2, or even 3) to prevent reapage normally. But reapage would still be prevented if there were a greater critical mass of 'keep's.

I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.
  • Comment on Re^5: Messaging the result of a consideration

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Messaging the result of a consideration
by LanX (Cardinal) on May 25, 2017 at 22:01 UTC
    This means that janitors must wait till the critical mass of reap-votes has been reached before they can vote?

    Sounds like more work for them and more delay before a reap happens.

    Personally I trust the judgement of our janitors more than normal friars++.

    I'd have no problems giving them double votes and the right to override veto votes for AM and new monks.

    Cheers Rolf
    (addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :)
    Je suis Charlie!

      Or we could decrease the number of 'reap' votes needed to trigger reapage, when the voter is a janitor.

      I'm looking for a simple-to-implement tweak which doesn't completely subvert the existing mechanism, but gives janitors a slight edge.

      I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.
        > I'm looking for a simple-to-implement tweak which doesn't completely subvert the existing mechanism, but gives janitors a slight edge.

        Sure, also my intention, simple to implement, simple to handle and transparent. :)

        Cheers Rolf
        (addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :)
        Je suis Charlie!

        sorry, testing something. please ignore.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1191234]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others wandering the Monastery: (4)
As of 2020-10-21 07:11 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    My favourite web site is:












    Results (212 votes). Check out past polls.

    Notices?