Re: Saints in our year book / Selected best recent nodes

[footpad]

"Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose"
-- Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr

As a member of pmdev, you certainly have the privileges (and the trust) to contribute whatever code you think would help improve the Monastic experience.

Having said that, I'm not entirely sure it's wise to draw a curtain over the accomplishments of those who established the foundations of something that has persisted (relatively unscathed) for longer than many tech careers.

I would suggest that the history (and the library of existing posts) is part of the site's value. (By way of example, perhaps it's worth pointing out that my first post in a dozen years linked to a previously-posted answer.)

I would further suggest that the open culture of (general) encouragement and support for studious effort exists, in great part, because effort of the current Saints.

Perhaps an alternate approach is worth considering. Have you considered something along the lines of a new "Selected Saints in Our Book"? If you model it after Selected Best Nodes, you would be thematically consistent with that feature and could end up striking a fair balance between encouraging new blood while honoring the legacy of those who laid the foundations.

I realize this is (kinda sorta) what you were alluding to, but I thing it's worth spelling out a little more clearly.

I dislike the idea of reworking the vote count/tally/impact calculation, partly because we have (had?) a strong tradition of not rewriting our history. Limiting the roll to a set number of years seems like not respecting our history.

That's my take. Other mileage may vary.

--f

P.S. As I'm sure you're aware, this sort of conversation isn't new. "Omnia illa et ante fiebant omnia illa et rursus fient."

[LanX]

> "Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose" -- Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr

<Reveal this spoiler or all in this thread>

Die Wahrheit triumphiert nie, ihre Gegner sterben nur aus. (paraphrased variant)

• Truth never triumphs—its opponents just die out.
• Science advances one funeral at a time.

--- Max Planck

I never meant that we ditch the old saints list or selected best notes.

But "Gamification" is an important driving force of this site, and having better metrics will improve the motivation of new monks.

I'm also tired of telling people that the ranking here doesn't mean much in the "guru scale" of authority, power or influence.

The more metrics the better.

[footpad]

Based on your use of a Yiddish phrase that (politely) translates to "old farts" and your reference to "bragging about past accomplishments," I initially read your proposal as somewhat disparaging. (And, given some of the other threads floating around, it didn't seem an unreasonable interpretation.) If I misunderstood your intentions, then I apologize.

While gamification is an element of the site (examples: post reputation, participation levels, etc.), I would suggest that the primary driving purpose of the site is to provide a supportive community dedicated to helping people solve perlish problems. The supportive part of the site's reputation is, I think, a major part of the site's longevity.

Perhaps I'm overthinking here, there seems to be an inherent tension between your gamification remark and your assertion that ranking doesn't mean much here. If rank doesn't matter, then why develop a feature designed to showcase member ranking? Put slightly differently, if you're adverse to people "bragging about their accomplishments," then why invest in a tool that can so easily encourage such behavior?

Let me be clear: I'm not criticizing. Instead, I'm asking questions to provoke thought, self-reflection, and perhaps even a small amount of empathy.

If you feel a "Selected Recent Promotions" node improves the flavor of the place, then code it up. Please. Let's put it out there and see what other people think.

If you truly feel more metrics are of value, then let's see some patches or some discussion about developing those metrics.

I would ask, though, if you're going to start a project of this nature, let's first figure out the problem that truly needs to be solved. That way, we can all collaborate on the solution in an inclusive manner, rather than making it generationally competitive.

Again, my take. Your mileage may vary.

--f

P.S. Have you see Musing on Monastery Content? If not, I recommend investing the time to read it carefully. There's a lot of meat, as well as a lot of back and forth. I think it does a great job of showcasing the strength of the community.

[LanX]

If there is only one main metric it becomes the absolute one.

But more metrics also mean more room for interpretation.

And it will put the old metric into perspective and relativating it's importance.

Most top players here know it's a game but they play it nonetheless, at least in chest.

It's pretty hard to praise the "best" posters of the last year (or last n years) if they are hidden in a sea of antique posters.

Regarding patches, I see a way to improve selected best nodes.

User metrics, I don't know yet.

But anything which implies patches at multiple nodes without possiblity of testing offline and without godly privileges to role back is a PITA.

So we'll see if it's possible.

[LanX]

> As a member of pmdev, you certainly have the privileges (and the trust) to contribute whatever code you think would help improve the Monastic experience.

pmdev != agile :(

[footpad]

Respectfully, I think that depends entirely on what you bring to it.

I've seen site updates made with alacrity and I've seen some that have never been applied.

It's true that controversial changes tend to take longer to reach consensus, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

If you feel an idea is worthy, then it's worth the time required to implement well and to achieve acceptance.

That's my take. Your mileage is free to vary.

--f