Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
There's more than one way to do things
 
PerlMonks  

Re: RFC: Hide Very Bad Answers From Visitors

by (anonymized user) (Curate)
on Aug 01, 2018 at 09:47 UTC ( #1219638=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to RFC: Hide Very Bad Answers From Visitors

A down-vote is not a vote to censor. Or as one biographer wrote, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Indeed, it could be said that votes on one thing being counted as votes for something more drastic is what makes the Brexit democratically unsafe. Could always have a separate voting button (up, down, censor).

One world, one people

  • Comment on Re: RFC: Hide Very Bad Answers From Visitors

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: RFC: Hide Very Bad Answers From Visitors
by jdporter (Canon) on Aug 02, 2018 at 01:02 UTC

    Except this isn't about censorship. It's about saying "this node is sufficiently $#!tty that innocent passers-by shouldn't be subjected to it".

      It's more innocent to be anonymous? I suppose that might be true in an increasingly repressive world, which I perhaps have to concur is the case.

      One world, one people

        > increasingly repressive world

        How many social networks do you know which allow to post anonymously?

        Cheers Rolf
        (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
        Wikisyntax for the Monastery FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice

Re^2: RFC: Hide Very Bad Answers From Visitors
by LanX (Archbishop) on Aug 02, 2018 at 02:07 UTC
    I never use down-votes for simple disagreement, that's where I use non-votes.

    IMHO down-votes are meant for inappropriate content or behavior.

    It's the equivalent of throwing eggs, not the opposite of applauding.

    For me this patch is just a variant of the "reap"-consideration, which always existed (IIRC) and isn't censoring either because you can always log in and read the original posting.

    Cheers Rolf
    (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
    Wikisyntax for the Monastery FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice

      For me this patch is just a variant of the "reap"-consideration

      This is exactly why I'm very ambivalent about this change.

      We already have a process in place for removing nodes from the public eye, and this adds a second way that bypasses the established process.

        Yep we should wait and see.

        At the moment it's hard to say how the dynamic goes.

        But I'm expecting less reaps in the future.

        And I think it depends a lot on the decision algorithm.

        What I don't like is to have to separate entities for similar functionality, which raises the software complexity even more...

        Cheers Rolf
        (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
        Wikisyntax for the Monastery FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice

      Thats quite a unique attitude not shared by most voters for the last 2 decades

        Says you, nobody, speaking for most users. No support, no identity, no citations, plus a sloppy comparison of unique v most.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1219638]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others making s'mores by the fire in the courtyard of the Monastery: (3)
As of 2019-07-20 08:05 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found

    Notices?