Cheers,

JohnGG

++ johngg I’m for it.
Others have pointed out that up voting nodes alters the worth of the node. blazer makes some good points for both sides, but his idea of a judiciously placed up vote would seem to be just right.
Many Monks spend a large amount of time helping others in the CB seldom posting to nodes.
A carefully placed up vote would be a recognition for their contribution to the Monastery.

   [amonk]++ for being patient with me
[download]

Clint

Everone knows a ++ on the "node" is worth two ++ in the "CB"

I don't agree with being able to ++ someone separately from something they've written (for reasons I'll explain), but I ++'d you, as it's an interesting idea, and displays unselfish gratitude on your part.

The XP is certainly fun, but the true payoff is feeling like you've helped someone out.

When I get a private message from someone I've never met in person, telling me that my input was valuable to them, it really makes my day!  Similarly, when someone responds with a follow-up post thanking me for helping, it's a nice affirmation of my participation in the learning process, and gives me the added benefit of being "praised out loud" (like when a teacher compliments your answer in front of the class).

Once you've been here a bit longer, I'm betting you'll see that this is where the real reward is!

1. If you allow ++, you should also allow -- - which means that you can mob other monks
2. It could easily be misused as sympathy "karma"
3. You'd have to invent rules how often you're allowed to ++ or -- another monk, and you'd have to implement it.

I think a sane workaround is to simply pick a node from the monk you want to ++, and ++ the node instead. That's not perfect, but less dangerous in terms of abuse.

Consider giving the monk "karma" points instead. To do this, type the following in the (public) chatterbox:

[Ovid]++
[download]

[Ovid]++ # you da man
[download]

Karma points are separate from XP, and are not an official feature of PerlMonks (unlike, say, Slash, where karma is intrinsic); they are managed by the user im2. To see the current karma tally for everyone, go to The Karma Report, accessible from im2's homenode. But ultimately, it isn't so much about a monk's total karma as the act of giving props in the public forum.

I expect that those monks who try to make their home nodes useful and helpful would also appreciate that sort of feedback. But there may be some good reason(s) (which I just can't think of myself) for not supporting votes on home nodes.

A problem with providing any sort of "spontaneous vote" on a monk's XP, with the ability to vote repeatedly on the same monk, is the (silly but inevitable) potential for abuse.

I certainly like the idea of being able to upvote or recommend home nodes, though I'd rather not see a '--' for them (not that you suggested that) as your home node should be whatever you want to put there (within reason) and largely beyond criticism.

'++' on the other hand, or something similar would be great particularly as it could be used to give a list of best or 'most useful' home nodes.

If you vote ++ on a home node once, you would not be allowed to vote ++ on the same home node again.

--
[ e d @ h a l l e y . c c ]

Great responses from all, many thanks! I'll do a general response here instead of having lots of small responses individually. See below for some re-thinking on my part.

johngg and moritz Advocate finding an existing node to ++ This is a good solution (that I didn't think of... duh!), and may end up being what I adopt.

I agree with the general want to avoid -- in this way (and other implied abuse). I didn't intend to advocate a --.

Voting on a monk's home node, for a possible "most useful home nodes" link is an interesting idea, but wasn't my original intention. Nice suggestion johnlawrence!

liverpole makes a great point about where the real reward is (I agree wholeheartedly), and maybe my intended suggestion will fizzle in front of this (which is ok), as the discussion progresses.

Many thanks to clinton and jdporter for explaining about Karma, I had no idea...

Position Clairification: Upon reflection, I suspect I was really asking for more of a thank you instead of a ++.

A thank you doesn't (necessarily) imply access to an inverse function, and fits in more with what my original thinking was. I would envision a simple thanks button on the home node, that each user is allowed to hit, say, once per day per homenode (and it uses a vote). Perhaps there is also a 35-Character (or so) text box that can describe what the thanks is for (this could be abused with sarcasm though).

When you get a thanks, you have the same chance for getting XP as when someone ++'s you, and maybe your home node shows a tally of your thank's-es.

Just my thoughts...

-Craig

Interestingly, Super Search can give a (very rough) picture of how much thanks a monk has gotten in replies. For example,
people replied to Ovid saying "thank you". (Once you've followed this link, you'll need to click the 'Search' button.)

A word spoken in Mind will reach its own level, in the objective world, by its own weight

johngg and moritz Advocate finding an existing node to ++ This is a good solution (that I didn't think of... duh!), and may end up being what I adopt.

It should be stressed that as good a solution as it is, one should be sure not to pick randomly a node from the given author, but explore a few of them and find the one that most deserves your upvote. Of course in the process of doing so it may turn out that they are all precious to you and you may want to upvote several of them. You can view this is a means to discover interesting nodes @ PM too.

One strategy is to look at the most upvoted nodes from an author, since they're likely to be good.

Another strategy is to look at the most downvoted ones, because they may simply be controversial or misunderstood. Or the author may have just slipped on a detail. I for one once used carelessly and naively the word "racism" without thinking of the psychological impact of it and thus conveying a distorted idea about the real meaning of my own post - planetscape kindly retitled it for me to avoid further --'s leakage.

Other times a good node is buried too deep into a thread to gain enough visibility and gets one or two downvotes out of ad hominem downvoting or some inexplicable reason. Spending your vote to correct the situation is not that bad. (Of course you wouldn't know if the reputation was negative until you vote it, but you can judge for yourself its value.)

Voting on a monk's home node, for a possible "most useful home nodes" link is an interesting idea, but wasn't my original intention. Nice suggestion johnlawrence!

Count me for one half-hearted about the possibility of voting home nodes, which ideally I cherish, except for the -- vote which anyway should be there for consistency. Perhaps home nodes could just not gain negative overall XP, or a care should be taken about abuses. But who really wants to be a home node anti abuse cop?!? Instead I'm sure I'd allow replying to home nodes: this was once possible but has been disabled since it was discovered to be. Someone still has a home thread!

A thank you doesn't (necessarily) imply access to an inverse function, and fits in more with what my original thinking was. I would envision a simple thanks button on the home node, that each user is allowed to hit, say, once per day per homenode (and it uses a vote). Perhaps there is also a 35-Character (or so) text box that can describe what the thanks is for (this could be abused with sarcasm though).

This has come out before, e.g. in a discussion I started myself. I for one would like lightweight "thanks" nodes, but many see in this the risk of deviating from the KISS paradigm, let alone that someone should implement the beast! ;)

Among other objections:

1. skews the value of node reputations
2. depending on your level of expertise, risks uprating a node with some significant defect
3. perhaps reflects confusion about the role and significance of XP

Better, IMO, YMMV, an acknowledgment/thank you in the CB (and yes, see re karma, above)
  ... and, better still, repay your debt by passing on the wisdom you receive.

Noderep != XP.

I don't believe anybody is trying to equate noderep and xp in this discussion.

If it can be read this way, please point it out so we can get it corrected.

Thanks

-Craig