http://qs321.pair.com?node_id=9894


in reply to RE: Saints: # of writeups vs. XPs
in thread Saints: # of writeups vs. XPs

I've been doing some thinking (uh-oh)...

Although there is a considerable amount of effort put into an answer, good questions should always deserve a fair ammount of XPs. If there were no clue-less monks in search of wisdom (such as myself), there would be no use for this site. Come to think of it, the term monk presupposes that one is in search of higher enlightenment.

Rating based on signal/noise (as you put it) might discourage the ardent to pursue knowledge monks. I suppose only the higher saints should be listed in a signal/noise ratio, while the rest of us mortals be listed by XPs...

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
RE: RE: RE: Saints: # of writeups vs. XPs
by Adam (Vicar) on May 03, 2000 at 04:28 UTC
    You make a good point.

    Of course, if we are thinking in terms of Monks, then we should not be concerned with the chart-o-saints. Sadly, we are but mortals (except two Monks whose XP demonstrates otherwise) and we have this obsessive flaw. Fine. In that case, I like the idea of some formula that takes into account our XP and our number of posts. Maybe (warning... introducing work) there could be a way to differentiate questions from answers from comments. Questions would be worth a certain amount, Answers with a good reputation would be worth some other formulaic amount, and comments would be worthless (or worth less, depending on how you want to read that.)

    I'm not sure of a good formula yet... but the algorithm is begining to take shape in my head.

[reply]
      Well, answers with a good reputation already are "rewarded" in the form of additional XP for the user who wrote them, as well as allowing "punishment" for nodes with a bad reputation.
[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion