Yesterday I noticed a node on "Worst Nodes" with a "-1" vote, with contents something like "Thank you for the help. It works now." I immediately upvoted it, and I plan to upvote such nodes in the future.

I see no reason that a person should be penalized for being gracious and thanking those who helped them. I suppose one could say "Bah! No new information content, so it's a waste of time and space." I don't agree, because providing positive feedback (beyond a ++) encourages people to answer questions.

I see that this has been discussed before at Increasing the Signal/Noise ratio of PM, and that most of the responses were positive towards thank-yous (especially if they added new information, but even if they didn't).

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: On Thankfulness
by legato (Monk) on Jan 06, 2005 at 16:20 UTC

    Additionally, the comment of "It works now" is helpful to future supplicants: when the original querant finds an answer that solves his or her problem, another searcher will know they've found a correct answer. I, too, will upvote all such nodes I find.

    Anima Legato
    .oO all things connect through the motion of the mind

Re: On Thankfulness
by BrowserUk (Pope) on Jan 06, 2005 at 16:41 UTC

    Bravo++. I could not agree more. There is no such thing as a "Useless thankyou".

    Hmmm. Saying, "Thankyou. You too", in reply to a lift that announced arrival at the requested floor with: "Fifth floor. Have a nice day!", as I have been known to do, might qualify? :)

    Examine what is said, not who speaks.
    Silence betokens consent.
    Love the truth but pardon error.
Re: On Thankfulness
by holli (Abbot) on Jan 06, 2005 at 16:50 UTC
    I agree fully. I once was very active at Experts Exchange before that place became too commercial. (What´s the purpose of a forum where you can search, but not view the threads found?).

    Anyway they have an "accept one or more answers" mechanism, that helps to finalize threads. You can still post to such threads, though. That gives the author of the answer and the people reading a thread a very good feedback, and mostly there is a "thank you" too.

Re: On Thankfulness
by bwelch (Curate) on Jan 06, 2005 at 21:59 UTC
    Common courtesy is generally appreciated. Also, saying "Thank you" lets people that replied know their effort was valued. Encouraging useful replies is useful.
Re: On Thankfulness
by Mutant (Priest) on Jan 06, 2005 at 16:45 UTC
    Thankyou for your insight tall_man :)
Re: On Thankfulness
by xorl (Deacon) on Jan 07, 2005 at 15:18 UTC
    I agree. I've thanked someone and been downvoted before. When I asked what was wrong with thanking people, I got down voted even more. The end result is that I don't thank people any more and I now firmlly believe we need to reform the XP system to include more accountability in it. When I comment on someone else's problem, I'd like to know if my answer was helpful to them. When I'm searching to find a solution to my problem and I find a node that has a number of different answers, I'd like to know which one worked best or was chosen as the final solution. A quick thank you reply to the best answer is perfect for this.
      This is why needs an "Omit from Voting" mechanism that can be applied to nodes whose submitters wish not to be subject to evaluation.
        I don't agree that perlmonks needs an "Omit from voting" mechanism - we "just" need to convince the monks that thanking people in public is *not* meaningless.

        A note thanking people for their help means that the OP read the replies and found them helpfull. This is a *good thing*. IMO a "thank you node" does two things:

        • It shows that the replies helped solve the problem at hand.
        • It shows that the OP appreciated people helping him/her.

        Both are good. The first one because it helps people assess the usefullness of the replies (even if most monks can already assess the usefullness of a lot of replies by themselves, that doesn't mean every visitor to this site can), the second one because it keeps a sense of community.

        I think people who downvote "thank you" notes should think harder about what they're voting on and why.

        Please feel free to downvote if you don't agree.

Re: On Thankfulness
by jdporter (Canon) on Jan 06, 2005 at 18:48 UTC

    I for one don't agree, although I don't feel very strongly about it.

    IMHO, "thank you" nodes are a waste. (But I wouldn't down-vote a node just for that.) If someone feels the need to issue thanks (and I'm certainly not against that), they could add an Update to their previous node in the thread.

    Of course, if they have more info to add, such as, "O.k, that worked; thanks. Now it's doing this odd thing...", then a new node is fully justified.

    All IMHO, of course. (But that goes without saying. (And that should go without saying... ;-))

Re: On Thankfulness
by stefp (Vicar) on Jan 06, 2005 at 19:22 UTC
    Thank you nodes that provice no additional information are a waste. You can do the same by privately messaging people. But a thank you node is great whten it is a summary of the discussion. As such, it is beneficial to everyone.

    Sometimes, it is interesting to know what led to a mistake. It helps other people to avoid it.

    -- stefp

      Thank you nodes that provice no additional information are a waste.

      Waste of what, exactly? Database resources? I think only the gods are in a position to comment on that. Waste of the OP's time? Obviously they didn't think so. I don't really see what the harm is.

        Waste of what, exactly?
        Waste of time for the reader that must find his way thru more chaff.

        -- stefp