in reply to XP for Consideration

Consideration is a waste of time, since the most useful part -- voting to edit a node in some way, is the form of consideration least acted upon. It's mainly useful for reaping at this point. I used to hit Nodes to Consider religiously until someone pointed out the above.

So, people will either be voting on an edit that will likely never occur or voting on whether to reap a post or not. Both are subject to abuse and both present conflicts of interest.

What we really need is a larger group of editors that will actually act upon the edit considerations. And if that did occur then I do not think we would need to offer XP as an incentives to vote.

Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks
My deviantART gallery

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: XP for Consideration
by GrandFather (Saint) on Oct 19, 2011 at 23:15 UTC

    Over time policy regarding the edits Janitors perform has changed. Currently the policy is much toward least intervention and, in particular, not editing node content for stylistic reasons. The group of editors is large enough.

    I often consider nodes for "code tags" and related mark up issues without any expectation that the Janitors will add code tags (except in the case of Anonymous Monk posts). I do this as a heads up to other monks that there is a formatting problem with the node, but the OP has been informed and a reply to the OP's node to that effect is not required. This seems to be much too subtle for many monks to grasp however, sigh.

    True laziness is hard work
[reply]
      That could be. My impression on the subject is probably a few years out of date. Regardless, it does not change much. OP deletes the OP and we consider it for editing to have it restored -- not likely to happen, etc. So, Considering is most useful for dealing with spam. So I don't hit Nodes to Consider that much anymore. And getting back to the OP's suggestion, what are we offering incentives for? Spam will be quickly considered anyway and anything else may or may not be acted upon. From that viewpoint, it looks like a system ripe for abuse.

      Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks
      My deviantART gallery
[reply]

        Actually consideration for restoring content is one of the things most likely to be acted on quickly, where the original content is available anyway.

        I don't see offering XP as an incentive to consider nodes as being good at all. There may be a small virtue in XP as an incentive to vote on considerations, but I suspect that's unlikely to happen and if implement it would be as an incentive to get new monks involved rather than try to re-educate experienced monks.

        And yes, it could be abused by XP gamers so on balance personally I'd leave well enough alone.

        True laziness is hard work
[reply]

      The group of editors is large enough.

      Reallly? There are 14 janitors, at least 5 haven't visited in over a month, at least 2 are puling double duty as gods

[reply]

        Yes, really. The workload is not high. If you take a look at Recent Janitorial Edits you will see there are a couple of edits a week. The other criteria of interest is having good time zone coverage by the Janitors and that I think we have. So yes I think we really do have enough Janitors.

        True laziness is hard work
[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion