in reply to Re^2: RFC: Hide Very Bad Answers From Visitors
in thread RFC: Hide Very Bad Answers From Visitors

that would mean that as the average node "quality" goes up, we become even more tolerant of even worse nodes.

That only holds true if the actual mean quality increases. If $NORM goes up (or down) purely as a function of how many votes are cast in total (which it will), then using -$NORM seems perfectly rational.

Instead, how about maybe something like -20 + $NORM.

That also suffers form the same problem as just using -7: it puts an arbitrary fixed point into things which becomes problematic if $NORM changes greatly from where it is today.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: RFC: Hide Very Bad Answers From Visitors
by jdporter (Paladin) on Jul 25, 2018 at 13:04 UTC

    I see your point; but I note that -$NORM also has this problem, because it has an arbitrary fixed point of zero.

    I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.
[reply]
[d/l]

      You are of course quite correct.

      Just for curiousity, is there anything in the codebase to stop $NORM from being negative? If not, then that's potentially an argument in favour of the arbitrary fixed point being below zero. Although there would certainly be bigger fish to fry if such a thing ever occurred.

[reply]
[d/l]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion