Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
"be consistent"

(jeffa) 2Re: (kudra) Re: Why - - A Node?

by jeffa (Bishop)
on May 15, 2002 at 16:12 UTC ( #166768=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re: (kudra) Re: Why - - A Node?
in thread Why - - A Node?

This discussion is entirely opinion, and i for one will not tell anyone how to spend their votes. I did not even want to touch this thread with a 10 foot pole until i saw this:

By downvoting, you effectively say "because I disagree with you, neither myself nor anyone else should even hear your ideas ... this person's voice shouldn't even be heard ..."

I strongly disagree with that argument. Replace downvoting with reaping and i will agree. Downvoting existed at this site long before reaping, which came about from trolling. Downvoting is peer review. Think of it as a pain receptor, like when you touch a hot surface. A significant number of negative votes (more than 2) means that the author _probably_ said something wrong. Downvoting is a simple feedback mechanism - replying would be better, but not everyone is confrontational. If someone feels that they have been wrongly downvoted, they can always raise the issue in the Chatterbox.

Replying instead of downvoting is not always an option. Some monks are too busy at the moment. Some monks might have already told the author in question in a past post why they were wrong, see the author do it again, sigh out loud and --. Some monks will send the author a private /msg after downvoting. Some monks feel that the author should know better, and no explaination for the downvote is necessary. Whatever the reason, it is their choice, and i respect them for exercising their choice, even if i don't agree. It is our right.


off the soapbox and back to learning Perl

UPDATE: reply to your reply

Sorry, but no, we don't agree. If you want to view it that way, then by all means do so. But i don't, because i do not believe that all nodes with a negative rep should be reaped. What would be the point of Worst Nodes then?

Also, what i agreed to was that reaping a node is silencing that person's voice, not downvoting is just a means to have a node reaped. Big difference. (and there are two categories: downvoting and reaping ;))

But i think that we can agree that Perl is the main reason we are here, so let's just agree to disagree on our interpretation of downvoting/reaping. Sorry to step up on my soapbox. ;)

  • Comment on (jeffa) 2Re: (kudra) Re: Why - - A Node?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: (jeffa) 2Re: (kudra) Re: Why - - A Node?
by educated_foo (Vicar) on May 15, 2002 at 17:02 UTC
    I strongly disagree with that argument. Replace downvoting with reaping and i will agree. Downvoting existed at this site long before reaping, which came about from trolling.
    Then I think we agree. I view downvoting purely as suggesting that a node be reaped, and believe that it is useful for this. Pushing a node's score negative has been the way to make it reapable for my entire short perlmonks lifetime, and this is why I do it. While downvoting is also a way to keep the node's author at a low rank ("bad peer review"), I don't particularly care about doing this, since I don't typically look at an author's home-node when reading posts. If I needed to establish some degree of trust in a post, I will read the author's other posts and their replies. That, or look for a spiffy, multi-colored .sig... So if there were two different categories of "--", "bad" and "shouldn't exist", we wouldn't have to use the same term to mean different things.

    Anyways, sorry to drag you onto the soapbox.


Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://166768]
and all is quiet...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others about the Monastery: (4)
As of 2018-06-23 03:27 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    Should cpanminus be part of the standard Perl release?

    Results (125 votes). Check out past polls.