Re^5: Looking for "random upvote" script

[ptum]

I'm not convinced that "personality voting" is all bad. If something you wrote offends someone enough that they are willing to go in and downvote you by hand every day, then perhaps the problem is with what you said, and not so much with the 'unproductive pain and sadness'. After all, they must find it 'productive' in some sense -- perhaps they feel it their 'duty' to trumpet to the world that your lofty reputation is undeserved. :)

XP is a game, and if someone feels strongly enough that you are not 'playing the game' nicely, then it is permitted (albeit not encouraged) that they gleefully downvote you, as long as they follow the rules and don't automate the downvotes (or cheat and register under multiple accounts). I know that I have often wondered at the caustic remarks of certain monks, thinking, "What a jerk! How'd that person get such a high reputation?

I think that the message cannot be entirely separated from the messenger. I know that I sit up and take interest when certain monks speak, more than with the posts of others. You may think that some of your node reputations are being unfairly diminished because you were unkind (or misunderstood) in unrelated nodes, but from another perspective, your tone on one subject has considerable impact on how (or whether) I listen to you on another topic.

For the record, I'm not the person who is systematically downvoting you, but I think that people with higher reputation XP ought to take extra care to avoid being mean to others, if only because they have more to lose (usually more posts to downvote).

Keeping perspective, a single monk willing to use all their votes to 'hurt' you can, on average*, cause you to lose 7 XP a day. Assuming they are deeply offended and keep at it pretty faithfully for a year, they'll diminish your reputation by less than 2500 points a year, well below your average gain over the same period. They'll also run out of nodes to downvote in about that same time period. So it would take a sustained and cooperative effort to strike at you in any meaningful way. Is there any evidence that there are more than one or two people who are gunning for you? Or can the gods detect that your detractor is violating site policy and registering multiple accounts?

Long term, as has been noted, your detractor(s) will eventually either (a) run out of passion to downvote you, (b) run out of nodes to downvote, or (c) give in to the lazy temptation to automate or double-register and so open themselves up to being dealt with by the gods. But it can be a pain to wait while they lose interest, as happened to me a few months ago. My unsolicited advice is to try not to let it kill your joy, and wait 'em out.

Update: * 'average' = a wild guess with the following assumptions:

• a level 11 monk with 20 votes a day
• most of your nodes are eligible for the 1/3 point-reduction per downvote
• 300 days a year participation

[merlyn]

I understand what you're saying. I'm not saying that some people haven't felt wronged by me enough to do this. Heck, some small unintentional comments I made a few years back cost me the respect of one of the leaders of the Perl community, and the sadness and anger that they feel still hasn't been resolved to this day, even though I've made numerous attempts through third parties to rectify the situation.

What I'm saying is that it's a waste for them to attack at a distance like that, because it doesn't give me enough feedback to be able to alter my behavior to include them, rather than exclude them. Maybe they feel that this is the only way they'd get noticed, which saddens me as well, as I'd like to think I always have an open door and open ear to feedback.

On the other hand, that sort of remote attack is also a selfish act, as it makes them feel better without necessarily wanting to help the world get a bit better. Eventually, they will figure out (we hope) that such random acts of violence really only make the world a less-nice place overall, not a more-nice place. This world is about the collective, not about the individual.

[ptum]

Well spoken, and well-reasoned. Most of us are on a journey toward maturity, and this most recent comment of yours has helped me a little forward. Thank you. :)

Oh, and by the way, thank you for the nearly 6000 instances in which you have contributed to this monastery in writing.

[Gavin]

There has to be more than one Monk down voting from the scale of downvotes in the XP chart.
Seems very petty to me considering the contribution that merlyn has made to the community.

++ merlyn

[syphilis]

cost me the respect of one of the leaders of the Perl community

This reminds me of our local community news service which will tell us things like "A well known local identity died today" ... without actually mentioning the name of the individual - and without so much as providing any additional information at all.

What we're all wondering is "Who did merlyn offend ?" and "Precisely how did he manage to do this ?".

Of course no-one's going to ask these questions (least of all me :-) because no-one wants to be seen as a busybody/gossip-monger.

Cheers,
Rob

[merlyn]

Since the matter is a private one (although with public figures involved), and introducing any more details will likely only fan the flames instead of resolve the issue, I've really said all I can or should.

[f00li5h]

Wow, maturity and brains, merlyn you're my hero

*swoon*

... and I respect and admire the folk who decided that it was worth taking the time to vote on a node that consists of no more than someone showing admiration for someone they look up to (after all, any attention is good attention)

Update: added more snide comments that will most likely to attract more --'s