in reply to Reputation for anonymous monks

These ideas have come up before, so you ought to do some searching (try null vote in super search).

As opposed to viewing nodes sorted chronologically (what i prefer), you view them sorted by reputation (just go to user settings...).

Tye says (i'm paraphrasing liberally here) you should vote on all nodes deserving of a vote because node reputation is more important than monk reputation (we should vote for nodes not for monks).

MJD says "you can't just make shit up and expect the computer to know what you mean, retardo!"
I run a Win32 PPM repository for perl 5.6.x and 5.8.x -- I take requests (README).
** The third rule of perl club is a statement of fact: pod is sexy.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Reputation for anonymous monks
by Abigail-II (Bishop) on Dec 08, 2003 at 09:54 UTC
    Tye says (i'm paraphrasing liberally here) you should vote on all nodes deserving of a vote because node reputation is more important than monk reputation (we should vote for nodes not for monks).
    That of course doesn't help with the problem the OP is describing. In the situation described, the potential voter isn't knowledgable about the subject at hand - so the OP lacks the knowledge whether a vote should be cast, and if, whether it's positive or negative.

    It also doesn't work well for people who don't have an account (no votes at all), or people with a low level (not many votes to cast).

    If node reputation is really more important than monk reputation, then why can you only see the reputation of a node after you've voted on it, while you can always see the reputation of a monk?

    I'd agree with tye that node reputation could be more useful/important than monk reputation, but because most node reputations will be hidden, node reputation is of limited use.

    Abigail

[reply]
      If node reputation is really more important than monk reputation, then why can you only see the reputation of a node after you've voted on it, while you can always see the reputation of a monk?
      So it doesn't influence your decision too much. Since you can currently view nodes sorted by reputation, you have an idea of which nodes were already ++ed, so if you don't know which nodes you should ++, now you have a small hint.

      MJD says "you can't just make shit up and expect the computer to know what you mean, retardo!"
      I run a Win32 PPM repository for perl 5.6.x and 5.8.x -- I take requests (README).
      ** The third rule of perl club is a statement of fact: pod is sexy.

[reply]
        So it doesn't influence your decision too much.
        That could be easily fixed by having the ability to give away your right to vote on the node. That's not implemented, so I remain with my point that node reputation isn't considered more important than monk reputation. Furthermore, to really to be able to objectively cast a vote, one should hide the author of a node as well, at least until voted. Or do you claim that votes can be influenced by knowing the node reputation, but not by knowing the author reputation?

        Abigail
        -- 
        Information wants to be free.

[reply]
Re: Re: Reputation for anonymous monks
by jonnyfolk (Vicar) on Dec 08, 2003 at 09:48 UTC
    Just wondered if you actually read the post? There's nothing of relevance in the 'null vote' search that you advocate, which simply refers making the null vote default. My suggestion is to make the reputation of a node visible to Anonymous Monks. I did a search and could not see that it has been raised before.
[reply]
      Yes I did. I understand your suggestion, and the concern (or rather the reason it didn't come to pass before) is that monks would be checking the reputation of a node before they cast their votes, or nobody would vote ++ or --, they would just cast a null vote to see the a nodes reputation.

      As for nothing of relevance in the 'null vote' search that you advocate, did you super search? I may have provided a link to a casual search, but I did say you should super search. I did and I found

      MJD says "you can't just make shit up and expect the computer to know what you mean, retardo!"
      I run a Win32 PPM repository for perl 5.6.x and 5.8.x -- I take requests (README).
      ** The third rule of perl club is a statement of fact: pod is sexy.

[reply]
        I would say that my suggestion is rather a halfway house between having the reputation on permanent view to all and the current system. A logged in Monk would have to go out of his/her way to view the reputation and so in most instances wouldn't bother, but the information would be available for those who wanted the information. There is also the point that AMs would be able to see the reputation that their contributions have accrued, which personally I see as a good thing.
[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion