in reply to Re: /msg me the reason of -- (frank)
in thread /msg me the reason of --

If you tell me that I made a mistake and then "punch" me, then I'm going to have a much harder time taking the criticism well.
When I vote, I try to make the decision based on the node content and without regard to its author. But apparently, most people perceive a downvote as something done to them, not to their node, even if they themselves go by this voting principle - I know I am among them far too often, even though I frequently remind myself about this.

Makeshifts last the longest.

  • Comment on Re^2: /msg me the reason of -- (post not poster)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: /msg me the reason of -- (both)
by tye (Sage) on Dec 01, 2003 at 18:57 UTC

    Your node sucks. Nothing personal. Really.

    How could my node suck other than by the fact that I made it suck? Perhaps the node_id sucks or you think the stupidity of the node was introduced due to solar flares interfering with the transmission of the bytes over the internet?

    I'm not talking about the mistake of thinking you suck as a person because you made something that sucks. That is an easy trap to fall into, at least a little bit.

    But downvoting my node likely takes XP away from me. And it almost certainly is a criticism of me. Unless we are going for something like "his node really sucks, but it isn't his fault -- he had a tough childhood...."?

                    - tye
[reply]

      LOL. Well, it should be noted that this argument is about downvotes in the technical realm, ie "doing it that way is wrong", rather than the social realm, ie "you're being offensive and rude". What I was getting at is that I find it much easier to stomach "your way of doing things described in 123456 sucks" than "you suck" or even "your node sucks".

      Of course it's a whole different game with downvotes for social reasons.

      Makeshifts last the longest.

[reply]

        Even saying "it would be better if you did X in node Y" is a criticism of the author of the node. It is likely a much more polite and less personal criticism than most and so is easier for the author to take well.

        If you accompany it with a downvote (and tell the author you have done so), then you have "added injury to insult" and made it much more likely that the author will take it personally or otherwise poorly. The author has reason for that, especially if your downvote cost the author one XP, IMO.

        As I said, I don't feel justified in downvoting a node simply because "it would be better if you did X" in it. That is a reason to reply (or perhaps /msg the author).

        I guess that since I sometimes downvote a node because it is rated higher than some "better" node in the same thread, there are cases where I don't expect the author to take the downvote personally. But part of why I think the author can manage to not take such a downvote personally is because it is a downvote on a node with positive reputation (higher than some other node with positive rep) and so is less likely to cost an XP and is late enough after the node was posted that the rep change is also unlikely to be noticed.

        Calling their attention to the downvote by mentioning it to them removes this posibility and I find it quite expected that it also makes it likely that the author will take such an announced downvote badly.

        I hope and believe that when a "compensating" downvote is noticed, the impact is much lower. I certainly hear few complaints about such and find them much easier to take on the rare occasions when I notice them.

                        - tye
[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion