I have been watching with amusement as my node on Lisp Associativity has 
'gone up and down' .  ('and up and down ' x 10) ;

[download]
I dont guess we have the machinery in place to see which nodes had the rockiest ride to their final net reputation. But there are far more than 9 votes in my current +9 reputation on this node.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: My non-monotonic net reputation
by arhuman (Vicar) on Jun 09, 2001 at 10:26 UTC
    I'm pleased you come to this subject,
    I was going to send you a /msg to explain why I downvote one of your post on this thread.
    (I downvote the 2 informative posts (first one and info about speed)
    and downvote the one about consistency)

    I must first say that I did Lisp long ago and I'm therefore far from an expert, my opinion on the thread is mainly based on the form rather than on the content as I'm not skilled enough to make a 'good' judgement on the content.

    That's being said I may try to give an explanation on this up and go cycle from my point of view :
    If people may have mixed feelings like I do, they may upvote the post containing information and downvote the biased post and your attitude.

    oops ! I said 'attitude', It's a really subjective idea, but let me explain.
    I have the feeling when I read your posts (in general and this one isn't an exception)
    that your not trying to inform or learn but
    rather make people think your point of view is the only right.
    Your example seems often biased to present your point of view in an attractive way
    (but not an objective one, IMHO)

    Furthermore I often see you react to comment in an complete opposition
    rather than taking the useful part of it (to you) and discussing the discutable points.

    I'm not saying what you say is often wrong (in fact there is often a lof of useful info), but you seems so 'rigid' in discussions.
    You know sometimes you convince more by listenning and giving some info, than by refuting step by step ALL your speaker arguments.

    Of course it's a personal opinion.
    But it's not personnality voting,
    It's only the way info are sometimes presented in a biased way (To my mind)
    and your way to refute and sometimes refute good argument (from my point of view ;-)

    I'm aware that this is highly subjective (just count the 'to my mind' and 'IMHO')
    and if you find my opinion unfair feel free to comment here or by private chat

    "Only Bad Coders Code Badly In Perl" (OBC2BIP)
[reply]
    A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.
(Ovid - Thank you, princepawn) Re: My non-monotonic net reputation
by Ovid (Cardinal) on Jun 11, 2001 at 10:01 UTC

    As has been said many times before: don't sweat it. Not everyone hates what you have to say (as evidenced by your defenders here and the fact that you do get ++ votes). You definitely have stirred up controversy from time to time and - I'm sad to admit - I have even had a role in this controversy. However, as time went on, I discovered something very interesting about your posts: while I sometimes have issues with what you have to say and how you say it, the responses to your posts have been fascinating and have taught me quite a bit about Perl and about programming in general.

    I don't care to see the flames and I have tried to make it a point to no longer participate in these things, but I do follow the resulting threads with a great deal of interest (when they cover programming issues). For this, I thank you.

    Cheers,
    Ovid

    Join the Perlmonks Setiathome Group or just click on the the link and check out our stats.

[reply]

Back to Perl Monks Discussion