in reply to Re^2: Anonymous Monk Voting/XP
in thread Anonymous Monk Voting/XP

Ok, I went back and read your actual suggestion. My problem with it is that it all hangs on the theory (I'd like to see some proof), that people prefer not to vote on AM nodes, when they don't have very many votes to spend. As far as I'm aware, thats not the case. Therefore there is no reason to change the way voting on AM nodes works at all.

The suggestions also hang together with the miscomprehension that reputation of nodes and XP are directly related. They arent. Anonymous Monk does not have/need/get any XP. AMs nodes DO have reputation however. Changing how votes on AMs nodes work would skew the system, they should be regarded in exactly the same light as all other authored nodes.

Does that explain my point of view better?

C.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Anonymous Monk Voting/XP
by wazoox (Prior) on Nov 07, 2005 at 15:28 UTC
    Does that explain my point of view better?

    I see your point, but I feel the same as the OP. I very rarely vote AM posts. I sometimes don't upvote nodes I know will have high reputation anyhow. I often upvotes posts from Monks I like, whatever it's about. BrowserUk says he upvotes all of Abigail's posts, too, so obviously who the post comes from is definetely important to many.
    Everyone follows (his|her) motivations to select what to (up|down)vote for; if many people do care about whom post it is, then may be should we consider altering the way AM posts reputation work (I personnally think voting for AM posts could be "free", it would be pretty nice).

[reply]

      Well, that proves there are some users who vote more hesitatingly on Anonymonk posts. Can we generalise to all users from that?

      Makeshifts last the longest.

[reply]

        Did I? I'm just arguing that as some do, perhaps should it be considered to alter the voting policy to adapt it a bit more to the way people use it.

[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion