in reply to Reputation Viewing Option?

Yeah, I suggested something like this before as well. I definitely don't think we should be allowed to see the reputations on nodes before you have voted on it. I think we should have a voting option that would say that we don't feel it deserved a ++ vote, but it shouldn't be --'d either. An option that lets us abstain from voting. It should be like the null vote in that it doesn't use up any votes, but unlike the null vote, it would act as if we had voted on that node and let us view the reputation and not allow us to vote on that node in the future.

I know I have voted up posts that didn't necessarily deserve to be voted up in my opinion because I was curious to see what other people thought about it. Having an option like this would satisfy people's curiosity about the nodes reputation without swaying their vote, or having the nodes rep changed because of it.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
(tye)RE2: Reputation Viewing Option?
by tye (Sage) on Aug 30, 2000 at 20:32 UTC

    I really like that idea with the modification that it does use up a vote (but doesn't give you any chance for ++XP). That increases the motivation to climb the ranks in order to satisfy your curiosity on more nodes.

            - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")
[reply]
RE: (2) Reputation Viewing Option?
by ybiC (Prior) on Aug 30, 2000 at 20:29 UTC
    I also had the same thought a while back, brother Boogman, but have since changed my mind.

    If a Monk Gone BadTM wanted to stalk someone, it could be done using "neutral" votes, such as you describe.

    It's sad, but the Monastery has grown enough that such things do need to be considered.   That, or I forgot to take my meds today and am having paranoid delusions.   :^P   (just joking about meds, but not about the chance that I'm way off base in my thinking on this.)

    Update : a number of fine Monks have pointed out why this is highly unlikely, and I have no reason to doubt them.   Not the first ybiC-brain-hiccup, certainly not the last.   ;^)
        cheers,
        ybiC

[reply]
      I'm kind of curious what you mean by stalking someone. I would think this would actually help with the Monk Gone Bad situation, cause one of the things you hear people complaining a lot about is people voting -- on all of a certain persons posts. Any nodes that had been abstained on in the past would be unavailable for this sort of attack. Plus if someone wanted to see the reps of the other monks, they still can as it stands now, they would just be changing the reps of the posts as they did so.
[reply]
        I'll grant that it's a bit of a stretch, but...

        if the hypothetical Monk Gone BadTM created dummy monk id's and used their neutral votes to discover reps of victim's posts, the Monk Gone BadTM could then apply his/her real votes to selectively -- nodes.

        This isn't something I've thought through or analyzed, so if there are holes in the logic, feel free to bring them to light.   On the other hand, I hesitate to publicly discuss such stuff, to avoid giving anyone bad ideas.

        Update : a number of fine Monks have pointed out why this is highly unlikely, and I have no reason to doubt them.   Not the first ybiC-brain-hiccup, certainly not the last.   ;^)
            cheers,
            ybiC

[reply]
      Why go through that effort to be a little more effective?

      Any potential target prominent enough to "be stalked" is likely to get plenty of experience anyways. It is the knowledge that someone is POed but unwilling to discuss it that is the issue, not the experience.

[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion