Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Don't ask to ask, just ask

comment on

( [id://3333] : superdoc . print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

As a level 10 monk, I can be trusted to know what nodes are worth approving and what nodes are not, unless they are my own?

Yes, exactly. Like I said, it is easy to develop a blind spot when it comes to your own writing. I've seen it happen. I've even had high-level monks /msg me asking to unapprove their question shortly after it happens.

Just a thought, wouldn't a vote on this been appropriate?

Well, in my experience, a full-blown vote is rarely going to give you a great indication. The results of the vote are highly influenced by extraneous items like the wording of the question (or even the replies). And, frankly, I don't consider this particular issue nearly big enough to warrant such effort.

If this is an unpopular change, we'll certainly know fairly soon due to this announcement and its replies. And this change isn't something that will be difficult to undo.

When I first mentioned this idea, I got negative feedback from several people. So I dropped it. Today, I got lots of positive feedback (from multiple people in multiple forums including the chatterbox, editors' wiki, and #perlmonks). I specifically sought out people who had previously been against it and got positive feedback from them as well. So I did call for a limited set of votes.

Personally, I don't feel that strongly either way on the self-approval issue itself. But I do feel strongly that just biting the bullet and disallowing self-approval will more thoroughly retire the issue than allowing self-approval but not self-frontpaging. I predict that, soon enough, the vast majority of monks will just come to accept that you don't approve your own nodes.

And I predict that allowing self-approval would result in this issue being discussed over and over again when someone notices that only one of the checkboxes is disabled for their own nodes, that someone has approved their own node of questionable value, etc.

I might not get help because the few monks logged in are not of a high enough level to see it.

I'd s/see/approve/. You can't make nodes that low-level monks can't see. Approval mostly makes them easier for infrequent visitors to notice. And even AnonyMonk can see the Chatterbox, so feel free to promote your node there. But I think this is a particularly unlikely scenario, especially these days (and I don't consider developing a blind spot to one's own question to be unlikely). I think footpad addresses this point well so I'll defer further comment.

        - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")

In reply to (tye)Re: Self-actualization... by tye
in thread Self-actualization considered harmful (no more "self front-paging/approving") by tye

Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post; it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":

  • Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
    <code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
  • Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
  • Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.