The title might be a little unclear, so let me try to clear it up. I love the monastery, and the invaluable knowledge I get from it. So when I see an interesting or informative post, I want to vote ++ to show my gratitude. But then I see that the monk is already a super deity (say merlyn, japhy, jcwren, and chromatic to name a few). So I wonder to myself, "This is a great post, and really clears this topic up. But they already have a bazillion XP. Should I save my ++ for someone w/ less XP, who might need it more?"

And that is the crux of my dillema. Yes, the post is right on the money. Yes, the monk already has tons of XP. So should I ++ them, or look for a lesser monk who also had a great post?

I want to emphasize that I am in no way wanting to hurt those great monks who contribute so much to our humble home. On the contrary, without them the monastery would be a much less attractive place to me and other monks, particularly new converts. It is the patience & long-suffering of these high-ranking monks that makes PM stand apart from other communities.

Another way to phrase the question is, "When, if ever, is enough XP enough?". This humble monks awaits your answers.

Update: Thanks for the replies reminding me that node_rep != xp.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Determining who is worthy of ++ votes
by stephen (Priest) on Mar 06, 2002 at 18:30 UTC
    The first rule of XP is: don't take XP too seriously. That way lies madness, IMHO. :)

    Remember, when you're upvoting or downvoting a post, you are primarily concerned with the worth of that particular post. Whether your upvote translates into XP or not is a matter of chance.

    There's no way to separate our feelings about the poster from our feelings about the post. Even so, votes should be primarily about the post, and at most secondarily about the poster.

    So my answer would be: there's no such thing as too much XP. I upvote merlyn's posts whenever he makes a particularly good point, just as I'd upvote any new user whenever she or he makes a good point.

    stephen

[reply]

      No, no, no...

      The first rule of XP is, you do not talk about XP.
      The second rule of XP is, you do not talk about XP!*

      All joking aside, I find these to be an excellent pair of rules. :-)

      * Especially not in the chatterbox in a way that might annoy people with excess votes. ;-)


      If God had meant us to fly, he would *never* have given us the railroads.
          --Michael Flanders

[reply]
Re: Determining who is worthy of ++ votes
by VSarkiss (Monsignor) on Mar 06, 2002 at 18:42 UTC

    stephen has the best point above; essentially, don't take it too seriously. As vroom said, a million XP and $1 will get you a cup of coffee.

    That said, remember that your vote is a comment on the writeup, not the person who wrote it. To think of voting as "giving XP to the writer" is the same (il)logic that stops people from voting on anything written by Anonymous Monk. If it's a good or bad writeup, vote appropriately. That way the higher-rep nodes1 will show up on Best Nodes and can be bound and framed for posterity. ;-)

    1Remember, nodes have rep, monks have XP.

[reply]
      I'd like to know where you're getting your coffee for only a buck. ;)

      ~Brian
[reply]
(tye)Re: Determining who is worthy of ++ votes
by tye (Sage) on Mar 06, 2002 at 20:09 UTC

    If you have the desire to vote on more nodes than you have votes available, then it makes sense to me to save votes for those who will appreciate them more. I don't mind at all if you don't upvote a node of mine in order to have votes for someone more "in need".

    I predict that eventually you'll get to where you often don't feel a shortage of votes and maybe you'll upvote me some then. (:

    While I agree that voting solely based on author is a very bad idea, I think that taking aspects of the author into consideration when voting is perfectly valid.

            - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")
[reply]
      Tye, you said it much better than I did. I just want my (currently limited) votes to count as much as they can. BTW, I'm pretty sure I have ++'ed some of your nodes in the past. :-)
[reply]
Re (tilly) 1: Determining who is worthy of ++ votes
by tilly (Archbishop) on Mar 06, 2002 at 21:12 UTC
    My attitude has always been to vote the post, not the person, whether the post is from merlyn or Anonymous Monk. (For whom votes don't matter.)

    I also am leery of "personality voting". That way lies feuds and grief which, while somewhat inevitable, is best avoided if possible.

    But ultimately they are your votes. Spend them how you see fit. If you think that encouraging people who are not as active to try more often matters to you, then do that. If you think that voting on leaf nodes is important because you know that others will vote on the root ones, do that instead.

    As for when you have "enough XP", my attitude was that I had enough when I had none, and I still have enough. People who are inclined to disagree probably would say that enough is getting onto Saints in our Book, which takes 3000 XP. After that there are no more titles, extra votes, etc.

[reply]
Re: Determining who is worthy of ++ votes
by drewbie (Chaplain) on Mar 06, 2002 at 19:01 UTC
    Thanks for the reminder that node reps & XP are not the same beast. For me, that was my hangup. Since I have a limited number of votes, I wanted to make sure they went to best use. Your perspective is right on. The purpose of votes is to show what nodes are the best. If a monk happens to get XP from their node's reps, then more power to them for good nodes.

    And on a related note, I had completely forgotten about the Best Nodes node. Can we get this a little more prominently displayed somewhere? Perhaps the leftovers nodelet is a good place.

[reply]
Consider The Post And Ignore The Poster - Re: Determining who is worthy of ++ votes
by metadoktor (Hermit) on Mar 07, 2002 at 00:33 UTC
    You have gotten a lot of sage advice but just to throw my two cents in...++ a post if you think it is valuable...who cares who wrote it.

    metadoktor

    "The doktor is in."

[reply]
Re: Determining who is worthy of ++ votes
by Darkling (Beadle) on Mar 07, 2002 at 16:11 UTC
    I have to say that I rarely even look at the name of a poster so it makes no difference to me what level they are.
    I have one and only one criterion for ++ voting: Does it make me laugh?

    Well ok so I vote ++ on some insightful posts too, but most of my votes go on funny posts. Just in case you were wondering, voting -- is reserved for obnoxious or downright humourless posts/comments.
[reply]
Re: Determining who is worthy of ++ votes
by Chainsaw (Friar) on Mar 08, 2002 at 20:15 UTC
    Well I think that first that all is the post, so first read all the post and then evaluate the vote. If the post is good enough (worthy) then vote ++, but if the post is not close to your expectations or the correct answare vote --.

    The person how write the post may commit errors. and this is a good way to show him/her where are they.

    God help me always to see the other face of the coin. And prevent me from accusing of betrayal those who don't think just as I do.
[reply]

Back to Perl Monks Discussion