Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
The stupid question is the question not asked
 
PerlMonks  

Re^5: Auto NodeReaper Approval (stop)

by tye (Sage)
on Jun 14, 2004 at 06:27 UTC ( #366420=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^4: Auto NodeReaper Approval (why?)
in thread Auto NodeReaper Approval

If it were a good thing to have *nothing* sit unapproved, then we'd just eliminate the whole approval process.

If your anal nature prevents you from leaving any node unapproved, then you *need* to stop visiting pages like Seekers of Perl Wisdom. (I thought there was something in user settings to turn off showing you nodes yet to be approved, but there isn't.)

You aren't doing a service to the site by approving every single node without regard for whether it should be approved or not. You are doing a *disservice*. What do you think approval is for? What do you think it does (beside remove the node from the bottom of the page)? Did you read any / much / all of the site documentation on the approval process?

BTW, your approvals of reaped nodes should have done nothing. Only editors are supposed to be able to approve reaped nodes (after you answer my questions above I'll even explain why). So one more bug to fix.

FYI, this reinforces my plan to get rid of approval and replace it with disapproval.

- tye        

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Auto NodeReaper Approval (stop)
by Paulster2 (Priest) on Jun 14, 2004 at 10:57 UTC

    tye, I think you totally summed up what I was asking in the first place, and maybe wasn't getting my point accross. The whole purpose of my original question was to make sure that I was doing things right for the site. I like the idea of a "disapproved" selection, because I have found nodes that I believe need some help. I have read the site documentation on the approval process.

    Only editors are supposed to be able to approve reaped nodes.


    I don't want to, nor have I ever tried to approve a reaped, only the Reaper owned nodes that appear after the reaped node is replaced. My original question only applies to those Reaper nodes that appear in the approval/moderation portion of the page. Should the Reaper nodes be unmoderated? I think that it should, because it provides only an informational source, not a content source of the original message. Isn't it just a placeholder of the original message? I also think that these nodes should have the ++/-- radials taken off of them. No need to vote on them. (Not that I have!!)

    In the mean time, I will no longer approve any of the Reaper nodes. I don't want to create any problems for the site, I am only trying to make it better. Thanks tye, chromatic and Happy-the-monk, I appreciate the clarifications and the opportunity to correspond with each of you.

    Paulster2


    You're so sly, but so am I. - Quote from the movie Manhunter.
      I don't want to, nor have I ever tried to approve a reaped [node],

      To quote myself from earlier in this thread

      FYI, it isn't "another" node, just the same node with the ownership and content changed and approval removed.
      So that is the reaped node. You aren't approving the reaped content, because that content has been removed from the reaped node and moved to another location that isn't even a node. What is left is the same node (because it has the same node_id and so any links that pointed to the node before it was reaped still point to it after it has been reaped). Yes, it's just a matter of terminology, but since I'd already covered this and it was getting in the way of us communicating, I guess the terminology matters if we're going to talk about this.

      Should the Reaper nodes be unmoderated? I think that it should, because it provides only an informational source, not a content source of the original message.

      A node being approved means that it is appropriate for the section that it is posted in. It causes the node to be displayed to anyone who visits that section's main page (for a while). Not approving a node means that our visitors who don't care to see behind the curtain and deal with approval and related issues aren't distracted by things that aren't considered appropriate, that don't serve the purpose of the section.

      Also, I think that many people vote to have a node reaped, in no small part, for the purpose of removing its approval.

      So, no, I don't think reaped nodes should be approved. And I think the bug should be fixed so that only janitors are allowed to approve them. Sometimes it is nice to publicly display examples of what shouldn't be posted and why. But I think that is more appropriately done by not reaping marginal nodes and pointing out the problem(s) in replies. Reaped nodes should not be advertised to casual visitors.

      - tye        

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://366420]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others pondering the Monastery: (6)
As of 2020-11-26 15:49 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found

    Notices?