in reply to ++ & -- & :-( users

Hiding the poster's name comes at a cost. The cost is that some of us, when looking at a thread that has grown long by the time we see it, skim quickly, and look first at people we know by reputation, to see if they've posted righteous solutions. It's a shortcut to find out if I have any value to add to the thread.

I hardly think this "anonymous downvoting" problem is so serious as to start giving up functionality.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: ++ & -- & :-( users
by little (Curate) on Apr 11, 2001 at 02:31 UTC
    Isn't that also a cost if you skip what people say which you do not know since your childhood?? Doesn't that prevent you from getting new points of view?? Do you really evaluate first WHO said something and then evaluate what he said instead of giving the CONTENT the presedence???
    I'm just asking - also myself :-)

    Have a nice day
    All decision is left to your taste
    Update
    Yes, I do believe that there are also different points of view and different opinions when we talk strictly about perl.
[reply]
      My use of "solutions" is (or should be) a hint that I'm talking about threads that discuss a technical issue or problem, rather than opinion threads. Since I often spend half of my day without any votes left, looking over an entire "problem" thread is something I prefer to short-circuit where possible in favor of moving on to some other thread where I might have something of value to add.

      If we were to staring hiding names, I'd lose the ability to take that shortcut.

[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion