Yes, we all notice that.. it's just how it is done... you vote and you see..
will you ++ a node just because it has a high rep? or -- for low rep nodes?
some links: 1 - 2 - 3 - n....
He who asks will be a fool for five minutes, but he who doesn't ask will remain a fool for life.
Chady | http://chady.net/
| [reply] |
Not that I would change a vote (or decline to vote) based on the score, but if I were about to -- a node, and saw that it had a pretty decent score, I might be inclined to go back and re-read it, to see if perhaps I had missed something.
i think you've just contradicted yourself. it looks like the current method may protect you from yourself ;)
~Particle ;Þ
| [reply] |
I think you mis-read what I was saying-- I wouldn't let
a score alone alter my vote, but seeing that something I
considered off-topic or in need of a stern "RTFM" has a
higher score might hint that I missed something the first
time I read it. Upon re-reading, I may still vote as I
originally planned. But if I do change, it's the re-reading
that prompted the change. Seeing the score only gave me reason
to pause and reconsider, before moving on to the (often
numerous) other new nodes still waiting...
--rjray
| [reply] |
On the contrary, I think that posts that aren't clear enough be obvious that they are not a case of RTFM deserve the very occasional -- they will get.
But though I do think that it's a good thing that current score can have no influence on voting, what if you're unsure of the merits of a node and you're curious? I'd suggest an option to abstain whereby you could forfeit your right to vote on a node in order to find out its reputation.
| [reply] |
