Re*: Increased number of downvotes at the Monastery?

The voting itself is interaction.

Not from my POV. It's just reaction.

Usually when I downvote, I reply and tell what is wrong with the post

But that's not the situation we were discussing. I mentioned that the downvotes were both unexplained and inexplicable (not flames, not inaccurate, not even re-orderable when viewing by reputation).

There is no question of *need* regarding XP or votes.

Context, my friend: you said that the vote told them what you thought of their post. Why is it necessary to provide a vote to tell them what you thought of their post, when you provided a reply? That is what is meant by "They really need a vote?"

The PerlMonk tr/// Advocate

Comment on Re*: Increased number of downvotes at the Monastery?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re*: Increased number of downvotes at the Monastery? by Juerd (Abbot) on Mar 11, 2004 at 18:08 UTC
you said that the vote told them what you thought of their post I see I did indeed. It's not what I meant. Perhaps it is what I meant when I wrote it, but I'm sure it is wrong. People cannot see what I think of their posts, because votes are anonymous. I vote to make sure the node's reputation also reflects my opinion. Juerd # { site => 'juerd.nl', plp_site => 'plp.juerd.nl', do_not_use => 'spamtrap' }	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re: Re*: Increased number of downvotes at the Monastery?
by Juerd (Abbot) on Mar 11, 2004 at 18:08 UTC

you said that the vote told them what you thought of their post

I see I did indeed. It's not what I meant. Perhaps it is what I meant when I wrote it, but I'm sure it is wrong. People cannot see what I think of their posts, because votes are anonymous. I vote to make sure the node's reputation also reflects my opinion.

Juerd # { site => 'juerd.nl', plp_site => 'plp.juerd.nl', do_not_use => 'spamtrap' }

[reply]