in reply to On Responsible Considerations

++ on this one, though I do not agree.

Why? Because this is the most rational, extensive and detailed explanation of an alternative view on the topic. I for myself, am now very very afraid to post some question/remark "ad hoc". Not because I am afraid it could be reaped, but I don't want to pollute PM.

The result is, that my read/write ratio of perlmonks has increased dramatically. I agree with you, that new monks may learn to study more before they ask something potentionally stupid or - worse - obsolete. Just because they haven't read the relevant "already posted/asked this" nodes.

I don't think, that it would have killed me, if some of my really dumb nodes were reaped instead of downvoted or ignored. In fact, in retrospect I'd be happy if that happened to some of them.

And this spans one argument where reaping might even be of use to those whose nodes get reaped: a) they're in some way protected from
- -ing but learn though. b) the signal/noise ratio is better for them. It might very well be, that at some 6/7+ level you aren't quite happy, that you've reached that level with 300 messages, while someone did with 50. (e.g.)

So then this brings us to the old(?) issue of being allowed to delete oneselfs nodes...

Just my 2 eurocents...


Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: On Responsible Considerations
by chromatic (Archbishop) on Jul 11, 2002 at 14:47 UTC

    I disagree about reaping nodes improving the signal to noise ratio. An ostensibly lame root node that generates a handful of intelligent replies has produced good results. A reaped node with good replies leaves the good replies stranded, devoid of context. I find that more noisy.