I am not sure what is wrong with http://cpanratings.perl.org/? Sure its a little rough around the edges and could use some nice report-ish screens to make it easier to browse, but its already integrated into http://www.search.cpan.org which is a major step. It has a pretty decent amount of reviews on it, and they are growing every day. I check in regularly and there is at least 1-5 new reviews a day.

Actually it's already pretty hard to decide whether a module is stable enough(there are many modules staying at version 0.24.)

Since when does a version number have anything to do with stability? It is a falsehood perpetrated by proprietary software, that 1.0 == stable, we all know that is not true. Stability can also is somewhat conditional on platform as well, what runs great on my Mac OS X 10.3.5 machine, may run really badly on the WinXP machine next to me (for some odd obscure deep-perl reason the developer doesnt know about). Stability should be proven in the test suite, and demostrated by running make test during the intsall process. Even then, there is no way to be sure, but hey thats software :-)

I think it's more useful to know what modules people are actually using, instead of their opinion on something they've never used.

Why do you say that? I may have done a thorough analysis on a module (code and all) and decided it was not for me for various reasons. Are my reasons not valid because I didnt actually use it? I could have determined a particular module would not work in mod_perl, while others happily use it for vanilla CGI. IMO, that is valuable information.

I'd suggest we use the same XP idea, that is, every registered user can enter the modules they're using (say, just a text box for entering: CGI, DBI, Data::Dumper, etc.), PM makes sure no duplicates from the same user.

This is an idea, but whats to stop me from XP-whoring and creating fake users who think my module is gods gift to perl?

We can probably add some XP related ideas: give more weights for people with more XP, even restricting how many modules one can enter depending on XP (sounds bad, but actually it forces people to pick their best).

I think this is a really bad idea. I think the U.S. presidential elections of 2000 have shown us that bad things can happen when some peoples vote count more than others. It does not work that way on nodes, so I don't see any reason why it should work that way for this.

Seriously though, I think if you really feel strongly about this, you should get involved over at http://cpanratings.perl.org/. They have a to-do list on their about page, and I am sure they would appreciate the help.