I think it would be good policy for having your username attached to the consideration reason. Some monks are kind enought to include their name in the reason box, but I think that the site should enforce that. Lack of anonymity will make people think that extra second before they click consider. | [reply] |
As a person who has had some "controversial" ideas in the past (not here, not yet anyway), I find the idea of reaping downvoted nodes uncomfortable. At the same time, the content of the node may have been worthy of reaping.Perhaps, there nodes should only be reaped for content, regardless of the reputation of the node, and when reaping, a reason that doesn't involve reputation must be given. I imagine that nodes that are downvoted will eventually be reaped, but there must be a reason for reaping beyond "nobody liked it."
Just my two cents worth
Michael
the blue haired monk | [reply] |
There has to be a bottom limit on the reps of nodes. There is nothing wrong with clearing out a node that is of such a poor quality that is has been able to garner that many negative votes. It's simply a house-keeping/cleaning function.
Now, I can certainly understand some debate going on about exactly where that bottom limit should be set, but to me the limit has to be there somewhere.
Roy Alan
| [reply] |