In the usual vote/moderation discussions; I have read that a few people think that deleting is getting over used. There are valid reasons for deletion. Said something wrong, invalid material etc., etc.

However, one person suggested that some bad posts should remain as a lesson for other people. Especially the noobs.

The only problem with this is that our more vote driven people would not like it as it could end up blasting them with -- votes.

Why not have a vote disabler ability? After a certain number of -- votes, the post can get locked. Or, maybe it costs you so many points to lock a post?

Just a random idea in the wee hours of the morning

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: A vote locker ability?
by oakbox (Chaplain) on Jul 19, 2002 at 06:51 UTC
    If you delete the examples, how is a new user going to figure out what kind of material is inappropriate to post? If a post is so egregiously trollish that it is downvoted to the point that it negatively impacts the XP of the poster, that acts as a brake on future behaviour of the same sort.

    What I would like to see is a poster's XP score next to every post and reply from that person. That would help a reader of the site see how credible a posting is, or at least give a reader some insight into what kind of community participation the poster has.

    That XP note should be static. Things I posted as an initiate should be shown as being from an initiate, I've learned a lot since then :)

    oakbox

[reply]

      "What I would like to see is a poster's XP score next to every post and reply from that person."

      Hmm I am not sure that would be a good idea. Might influence some people to vote the same to fit in with the rest. Herd mentality. Then on the other side, you get people that will down vote it simply because it is high.

      As to the static titles on posts. Sounds reasonable but I get the feeling that would take a great effort to change that. Not sure....

[reply]
        I would welcome the idea. Currently, I cast many votes for no other reason than to find out how many votes a post has, as I'm curious in what people think is a good post and what isn't. There's no option of voting "blank", so I've to vote either ++ or --. That means, I vote -- to posts that do not earn a --, and I vote ++ for posts that do not earn a ++.

        I'd trade in my ability to vote to see the votes. ;-) One could prevent a "herd" mentality by starting off with no votes displayed to a post, but giving readers the option to view the number of votes cast. Once you select that option, you no longer are able to vote for that post.

        (And now we'll get people saying that they are happy with the system as it is, and I shouldn't demand vroom to change the site. And that I'm a heritic for even wanting to change the site. Well, read again. I'm not suggesting anything should be done. I'm just pointing out what could be done.)

        Abigail

[reply]
        Might influence some people to vote the same to fit in with the rest. Herd mentality.

        I would like to see the XP of the person making the post, not the reputation of the post itself.

        As to the static titles on posts. Sounds reasonable but I get the feeling that would take a great effort to change that.

        It would be next to impossible to make that retroactive. The XP of a poster is not stored in the database. But it can be implemented for future posts. I guess it's just a matter of finding out if this is a good enough idea.

        oakbox

[reply]

      ObXPDoesn'tMatterPost:

        What I would like to see is a poster's XP score next to every post and reply from that person. That would help a reader of the site see how credible a posting is...

      Bogus. I'd hate for someone checking XP scores on posts to assume that I (4272 XP as of this post) am a more credible Perl hacker than, say, Abigail-II (3399 XP as of this post).

        ...or at least give a reader some insight into what kind of community participation the poster has.

      That's more reasonable, but I'm not sure how useful it would be. It might add some information to a Perl Monks Discussion post, but I'm not convinced that it'd be worth the effort.

      --
      The hell with paco, vote for Erudil!
      :wq

[reply]
Re: A vote locker ability?
by FoxtrotUniform (Prior) on Jul 19, 2002 at 16:16 UTC

      ...one person suggested that some bad posts should remain as a lesson for other people. Especially the noobs.

      The only problem with this is that our more vote driven people would not like it as it could end up blasting them with -- votes.

    Well isn't that just a shame. You hit submit and you take your chances... and if you're vote-driven, the extra examples of what not to do should nudge you in the "right" direction. I don't see this as a problem at all.

    --
    The hell with paco, vote for Erudil!
    :wq

[reply]
      Exactly.

      Makeshifts last the longest.

[reply]

Back to Perl Monks Discussion