|
|
|
| We don't bite newbies here... much | |
| PerlMonks |
Re: We should elminate: Anonymous, and DOWN-votingby CountZero (Bishop) |
| on Nov 30, 2011 at 13:38 UTC ( [id://940846]=note: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
|
I think the Perlmonks system is not broken so we should resist all urges to repair it. Eliminating down-votes would definitely take away a very valuable element of appreciation of a post's (relative) merit. I am not blind to the fact that a very small minority uses down-votes to personally punish some other Monks, but that is such a rare occurrence (IMHO) that it disappears in the random fluctuations of all voting. And to make things clear, I upvoted your post since I think any post which shows that the OP was honestly thinking on how to improve the Monastery merits a plus-vote, even though I think your proposal is wrong.
CountZero A program should be light and agile, its subroutines connected like a string of pearls. The spirit and intent of the program should be retained throughout. There should be neither too little or too much, neither needless loops nor useless variables, neither lack of structure nor overwhelming rigidity." - The Tao of Programming, 4.1 - Geoffrey James
In Section
Perl Monks Discussion
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||