I think one of the challenges Perlmonks faces is, what we expect from us. From your past posts (discussion about "contributions of monks"; discussion about "voting scale") I get the impression that you think there are good (= contributing) members of our community and bad members, who are detrimental to the goal of our community.

I have two problems with this. First, your posts seem to me somewhat critic of people of low(er) XP. Of course, newcomers won't fit in and be a "useful" part of the community from the start, but I don't think that "us" old-skoolers (or old scholars) should put as much effort into the XP system as you display. Of course it's sad if people see their only chance for attaining monk by voting out, but if that's their only ability, so be it I say. Second, you seem to distinguish Perlmonks into two categories, those who are Perl monks and those who benefit from it without contributing back - a separation which is not necessarily wrong, but I feel that you think that there should be only one class of Perlmonks. This brings me down to what Perlmonks is to me - a helpfull community where everybody is helped and where everybody can benefit, as long as they obey some basic rules of style (<CODE> tags) and form (polite language). And while it makes sense to distinguish between people who contribute and people who don't, I think that the current system of rank and XP serves this purpose quite well and is already enough motivation to participate and contribute to those who want to.

The people who only vote out and do not actively and repeatedly contribute to Perlmonks are a part of us, just as Anonymous Coward and Trolls are a part of Slashdot. And honestly, I'm much more content with having people who vote out.

I know that you had your gripes with mt2k boasting about how he attained monk rank without ever writing anything useful, and I must admit that this also dented my relaxedness regarding his posts. But I always reminded myself that mt2k is very young (about my age when I started visiting BBSes) and you do need a relaxed approach when dealing with (I know you won't like it, mt2k, but...) kids. Personally I viewed mt2k as some form of jester of the monastery, always exploring stuff within the mechanics of the monastery while trying to learn stuff about Perl.

If I've misinterpreted or misunderstood you in any way, please tell me so.

You hit the nail on the head, for the most part. ++ to you.

I do believe that all should do their best and contribute. It is a sad fact of life that not all people are going to fit in everywhere. It is a sad fact of life that not everyone is going to succeed. I am all for success. If I behave negatively toward the success of others, then I do not deserve my own success.

However, some of the monks here, including myself, are not really willing to let someone skate by abusing the system. I have heard mt2k repeatedly claim that he did nothing wrong by making the system work for him. He admitted that he abused the system to gain rank, and therefore privileges.

I also believe that everyone should contribute. In some small way, everyone should do their part, pull their own weight. If some of us are able to answer coding questions, we answer them. If some of us are able to put effort into making the site more enjoyable, we do it. Everyone works and everyone gains. We should have no members who won't contribute. mt2k contributed a lot to the site, and that is why I don't think he should leave. Unfortunately, he also took a lot from the site. He was disrespectful of others, he aggravated many people, even so much so that he joked on his home node about how annoying he was. I asked him to moderate his behavior for the good of the community.

Now, I have never knowingly been disrespectful to lower XP monks. I had a low XP at one point and I worked at it. I welcome all who wish to study at our monastery. Lower XP is a fact of life. That is the only part of your response that isn't quite on target.

You may be content with people who gain rank without showing Perl aptitude or general aptitude. For the most part, it doesn't bother me. It apparently bothers some, otherwise the new experience system would have never been devised.

There will always be people who contribute and people who don't. In projects, at work, on teams, in sports, etc, there will be people who rely on the work of others to get by. mt2k was not really one of these people. He did make this site more unique and more interesting, when he was behaving. He did ask questions and get information into the public record, and I think that is the best way someone can contribute when just starting here. I do feel, however, that higher levels of monks need to contribute more than just questions to the site. After "monk" a member of the community needs to contribute more evolved content. You wouldn't give a doctorate to someone who kept asking easily answerable questions, would you?

The thing that bothered me the most about mt2k is that his average Rep per node was very low, probably negative. Think about that for just a second. . . By all accounts, he should have been losing XP, not gaining. You said it yourself: he was viewed as the jester of the monastery. Should a friar be a jester?

Thank you for your thoughtful response.

J. J. Horner
Linux, Perl, Apache, Stronghold, Unix
jhorner@knoxlug.org http://www.knoxlug.org/