monkdiscuss
Petruchio
<p>
Greetings, brethren and sistren. I come to you with a <strong>scary
proposal</strong>; one which you'll doubtless wish to downvote just as
quickly as your mousing skills will allow. Once you've completed that
urgent task, however, I'm hoping you'll find a bit of time to read over
the idea, and see what you think. ;-)
</p>
<p>
Quite some time ago, [mighty vroom|vroom] was kind enough to
[id://5943|install our voting system]. It was a pretty darned good idea:
good posts would be voted up, and bad posts would be voted down. And to
make a game of writing good nodes, users would
[id://5938|gain experience and levels] for casting and receiving votes.
And with those levels would come new powers... which, at the time, simply
meant more votes.
</p>
<p>
The system wasn't (and isn't, and won't be, and probably can't be) perfect.
Myriad discussions were held, and many changes were made, but even from the
beginning the system was effective in aiding the growth of a unique community.
One thing which hasn't changed, though, is the level system; and because it
hasn't changed, it's really very different now.
</p>
<READMORE>
<p>
You see, back when I was your age, <strong>we had respect for
our elders!</strong> Err... sorry; that slipped out. I meant to say: back
when I was an Initiate, this was a much smaller community. There were very few
saints, and the relatively small number of voters didn't have that many votes.
So when a <em>really</em> good post came along, it might earn a reputation of
20 or so. Even with a much lower $NORM, and a big XP bonus for using all of
your votes on a given day, it was far harder then to become a saint.
</p>
<p>
Today, of course, things are rather different. We have, at the moment, 322
[Saints in our Book]; and with the top node of the <em>week</em> weighing in
at a rep of 101, hitting that 3000XP mark for Saint just isn't all that
challenging. Gaining levels is a silly game, of course; it's not really why
we help each other out. But we're programmers; we're famous for enjoying
silly games long past the age where sensible people have had enough. And for
more and more of us, the game is over.
</p>
<p>
The question is whether we'd like it not to be over... and, just as you were
wondering whether I had one, that brings me around to my point. I think it'd
be cool to change the level system. But since a chart is worth a thousand
words (depending on the size of a word on your system), let me show you what
I'm thinking. Just keep in mind that it's a proposal, and that the details
can change.
</p>
<table style="border: thin solid gray;">
<caption>Perlmonks Level Summary</caption>
<tr> <th>Level</th> <th>XP</th> <th># Of Votes</th> <th>Title</th> </tr>
<tr> <td> 0</td> <td> 0</td> <td> 0</td> <td>Initiate </td> </tr>
<tr> <td> 1</td> <td> 20</td> <td> 2</td> <td>Novice </td> </tr>
<tr> <td> 2</td> <td> 45</td> <td> 4</td> <td>Acolyte </td> </tr>
<tr> <td> 3</td> <td> 75</td> <td> 6</td> <td>Sexton </td> </tr>
<tr> <td> 4</td> <td> 110</td> <td> 8</td> <td>Beadle </td> </tr>
<tr> <td> 5</td> <td> 150</td> <td> 10</td> <td>Scribe </td> </tr>
<tr> <td> 6</td> <td> 200</td> <td> 12</td> <td>Monk </td> </tr>
<tr> <td> 7</td> <td> 260</td> <td> 14</td> <td>Friar </td> </tr>
<tr> <td> 8</td> <td> 340</td> <td> 16</td> <td>Hermit </td> </tr>
<tr> <td> 9</td> <td> 440</td> <td> 18</td> <td>Deacon </td> </tr>
<tr> <td>10</td> <td> 560</td> <td> 20</td> <td>Curate </td> </tr>
<tr> <td>11</td> <td> 715</td> <td> 22</td> <td>Vicar </td> </tr>
<tr> <td>12</td> <td> 920</td> <td> 24</td> <td>Parson </td> </tr>
<tr> <td>13</td> <td> 1200</td> <td> 26</td> <td>Prior </td> </tr>
<tr> <td>14</td> <td> 1560</td> <td> 28</td> <td>Abbot </td> </tr>
<tr> <td>15</td> <td> 2050</td> <td> 30</td> <td>Chancellor </td> </tr>
<tr> <td>16</td> <td> 2725</td> <td> 32</td> <td>Bishop </td> </tr>
<tr> <td>17</td> <td> 3700</td> <td> 34</td> <td>Arch-Bishop </td> </tr>
<tr> <td>18</td> <td> 5050</td> <td> 36</td> <td>Cardinal </td> </tr>
<tr> <td>19</td> <td> 7050</td> <td> 38</td> <td>Grand Inquisitor</td> </tr>
<tr> <td>20</td> <td> 10,000</td> <td> 40</td> <td>Saint </td> </tr>
<tr> <td>21</td> <td>Highest</td> <td>100</td> <td>Pope </td> </tr>
</table>
<p>
The basic idea, here, was to raise the highest normal level to the point
where it presented a more appropriate challenge, to double the number of
levels, in order to maintain that steady sense of progress which is so
motivational for many at the lower levels, and to have the whole thing be
a bit more logical than the current system.
</p>
<p>
There would be several implications for most users. First, the good news:
your level would probably go up! Hooray!
</p>
<p>
Okay, now the "beautiful day for my auto-da-fe" news: while a few folks would
have more votes, many would have fewer. There would probably be some
adjustments to the level powers, the details of which I've not worked out.
And the number of people who hold the title of 'Saint' would drop to (at the
moment) 49. I, for instance, would drop to 'Arch-Bishop'. But hey, how can
you resist the glamor of becoming a <em>Grand Inquisitor</em>?
</p>
<p>
Now, if you can get past all that, it's downhill from there. You might find
the XP requirements odd, but they are sensible: each level requires a bit more
than the last one did, in a fairly smooth curve from 0 to 10,000. I actually
cooked up an algorithm for this, and then rounded off the numbers a bit. I'd
have to dig around to find the algorithm, but rest assured, it was
breathtakingly elegant. I didn't bury it to keep from looking like a
mathematical clodhopper. Trust me.
</p>
<p>
The level titles, and their order, I devised after a truly ridiculous amount
of time spent reading online reference works like the
[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/|New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia], with a
fair bit of assistance from the equally misguided [zdog]. They are not wholly
accurate, of course; for one thing, there just <em>isn't</em> a
straightforward hierarchy like this to use as a model. The real organizations
from which offices and roles have been borrowed show a few thousand years of
cruft; there are sub-hierarchies, differing roughly-parallel orders of authority,
and so on. I nixed 'Pontiff' in favor of a single 'Pope', since they're roughly
synonyms. I threw in 'Monsignor', despite that it's actually an honorific for
anyone who has risen to at least 'Prior', just because it sounds cool. And, as
some will have guessed, I just nabbed 'Grand Inquisitor' straight from Dostoevsky.
Anyway, you just can't have too many people going, "No one expects the Perlmonks
Inquisition!" in the CB, right?
</p>
<p>
Since I know it's going to come up, I'd might as well address it now: yes, we
borrow language from a religious tradition. Since I've already written it,
quite some time ago, I'll just link to my [id://60431|opinion on the topic]...
which contains some suspiciously familiar elements. Short version: this is
as much of an endorsement of Christianity as dressing up as Father Guido
Sarducci for Halloween.
</p>
<p>
It's also been noted that this system <em>could</em> be made adaptive, so that
the level requirements changed in order to assure that a certain proportion of
the people were at any given level. I don't favor such a scheme, as I think
people like more static goals, and as this would make the system more directly
competitive. If, four years hence, the system needs to be changed again, I'm
okay with that.
</p>
<p>
So, anyway, there's the idea. I'm hoping that a lot of people receive it in
the same spirit of fun in which it is proposed, and that there is a minimum of
panic. Implementation is not imminent; this really is a proposal, at this point.
While I would like to see this happen, I do not think it's worth a major upheaval;
the peace of our community is more important than 'improvements' to the system
which exists to serve the community. Your replies will, therefore, be taken
quite seriously in an effort to determine a consenus.
</p>
</READMORE>