Re^3: Can't access a node on a publicly accessible list

Well, patches aren't excempt from the quality survey mechanism of PerlMonks and occasionally get downvoted, although for other reasons than e.g. SoPW's or meditations (patching the wrong thing, introducing errors with the patch, patching based on wrong assumptions, etc). Then often a -1 is enough for them to briefly show up among the Worst Nodes.

--shmem

_($_=" "x(1<<5)."?\n".q·/)Oo.  G°\        /
                              /\_¯/(q    /
----------------------------  \__(m.====·.(_("always off the crowd"))."·
");sub _{s./.($e="'Itrs `mnsgdq Gdbj O`qkdq")=~y/"-y/#-z/;$e.e && print}

Comment on Re^3: Can't access a node on a publicly accessible list

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Can't access a node on a publicly accessible list by demerphq (Chancellor) on Jul 22, 2007 at 14:57 UTC
Originally i liked the idea of voting on patches. Then i realized that it was a bad idea because it allows people to show disaproval without providing any substance. It doesnt provide the author with any real information as to whats wrong with the patch it just signals some kind of disapproval. Which is a problem as there are people who can vote who are generally feature adverse. They dont see any need for providing functionality that they do not directly want. And they vote. So i ended up just ignoring patch votes. If the person voting didnt want to to take the time to explain their objection I personally refused to consider their opinion worthy of consideration. If I were still an active PMdevil I would probably advocate that we remove the ability to vote on patches. --- $world=~s/war/peace/g	[reply]
Re^5: Can't access a node on a publicly accessible list by jdporter (Paladin) on Jul 22, 2007 at 15:32 UTC
So, voting on patches is functionality that [you] do not directly want. Eh? ;-) I appreciate voting on patches because it's one of the few ways in which pmdevils get actual XP credit — however little — for their efforts. And it is certainly easy enough to ignore it if that's your inclination. A word spoken in Mind will reach its own level, in the objective world, by its own weight	[reply]
Re^6: Can't access a node on a publicly accessible list by demerphq (Chancellor) on Jul 22, 2007 at 15:51 UTC
Well I certainly agree with you that voting can provide well deserved positive feedback for a developer. Although my experience was that it was more likely to get a downvote on a patch than it was to get an upvote. But maybe thats because people didn't like my patches. :-) Thinking about this a bit more I asked myself why I feel that commentless voting is appropriate for most of the site, but that it isn't useful for patches. There is a contradiction there that I can't quite resolve. Patches just seem to be of a nature where no feedback is better than trivalent response like a yes-no-ignore-vote. Its like some kind of Warnocks dilemma. If you downvote me is it because you dont like my code, or is it the functionality? Is it because I used an inefficient approach or is it because there is a flaw in my logic? With a normal node generally an author can imagine what aspect earned the downvote, with code the range of possibilities is so wide that it is just hard to tell. Also the size of the sample pool makes a difference as well. With a normal post the number of people voting tends to cancel out spurious votes. When there are only ten voters or so anonymous -1 becomes a bigger deal. --- $world=~s/war/peace/g	[reply]