|go ahead... be a heretic|
Re: Thoughtless voting?by luis.roca (Deacon)
|on Jan 29, 2011 at 19:01 UTC||Need Help??|
I upvote for a wider variety of reasons than I downvote. I vote regularly but the amount I vote upon each visit varies (usually 14 votes is a lot for me and many go unused).
I can't say with any certainty if there is a trend of upvoting "bad"
posts. I certainly notice posts that get upvotes that just make me shake
my head. Maybe we could address that by having the flipside of "No
Significant Downvotes" in cases where there is a
Would it be good to distinguish openly discouraged nodes? I think it could be helpful if we could label discouraged AND helpful nodes. (Although I don't think it will have a direct effect on voting.)
I could see a subgroup of monks who have "Front Paging" powers also labeling a thread/post "Posted from Under a Bridge. Cross at your own risk" for trolling. But more importantly I would love to see a checkmark for "Solved" SOPW questions. This is Perl so ideally it would say something like: "3 Ways to Do It." if three good answers have been provided. Would either of those labels invite more or less poorly considered votes? I don't know.
I value the voting system here and feel it's one of the better metrics for post quality that I've seen in the great Weboverse. The voting system has helped me learn what are considered good vs. bad posts here. I like the fact that voting and XP gains do not have a 1:1 relationship. I really like that in order to gain a good amount of XP monks have to contribute to the site by posting. Sometimes (as others have stated) the hard work isn't rewarded by large (or any) gains in XP but I don't think that's the sole or primary reason people post (or even in the top ten reasons they post).
"...the adversities born of well-placed thoughts should be considered mercies rather than misfortunes." — Don Quixote