If downvotes frighten you, you're doing something wrong.

However, I can see your point. I'm slightly in favor to allowing downvotes but not removing XP for root-level nodes in the discussion section. (I don't care enough to write a patch, though.)

That does leave the possibility of people posting personally abusive or other downvote-worthy material as comments, so I'd like to keep downvotes active there.

It occurred to me that preventing XP loss from having your root PMD node downvoted would increase the motivation for people to post "Your idea sucks" replies instead. And that caused me to think that people should be more concerned about having their ideas ridiculed than about losing a few imaginary points. Even posting a really stupid idea to PMD is unlikely to cost you more points than you'd earn with just a bit of typical PM contributing (posting a couple decent nodes and casting some votes).

Then the idea of more "Your idea sucks" replies endeared me to the idea, somewhat.

But I like that the posting of poorly thought-out suggestions (especially regarding down-voting) has been effectively discouraged (by spontaneous community concensus). It is my impression that PMD root nodes get down-voted more because they tend to not be well thought-out, not because people disagree with a proposal.

In the end, I personally rejected this feature change mostly because I suspect the primary result of such a change would be to make PMD a dumping ground for whiney complaining about things like how some other monk treated one, etc. I don't think it would result in an increase in useful discussion. PMD used to be so often a dumping ground for whiney complaining about down-voting that many long-time members don't even bother to read PMD, it appears.

By the OP's own admission and demonstration, the advantage would be to allow the OP to post a PMD node without having to "feel silly". I think feeling silly is perfectly appropriate in the described situation and it is a reasonable amount of deterrence, not something we should be saving people from.

If you want to open a discussion, feel strongly enough about it to overcome feeling silly for posting anonymously or to do a good enough job that you can proudly post it under your registered name. Discussions work so much better when the person opening the discussion puts some effort into it.

- tye        

It is my impression that PMD root nodes get down-voted more because they tend to not be well thought-out, not because people disagree with a proposal.

FTR: I do downvote proposals in PMD if I don't like them on principle. If the poster put some effort into the proposal I usually also take the time to explain my reasoning. Though most of the really bad proposals seem also pretty badly thought out.

Completely agreed with the rest of your post, though.

"What should it profit a man, if he should win a flame war, yet lose his cool?"

Since several people seem to believe that PMD root nodes get downvoted more than, say, SoPW root nodes, here is a graph on that point:

Each "bar" spans 10 reputation values around the labeled value. So the "-15" bar shows the percentage of recent (since node 600,000) SoPW and PMD root nodes that have a reputation between -10 and -19 (the "-5" only covers 9 values, -1 through -9).

The chart shows that PMD root nodes are much more commonly in the +20..+99 reputation range than SoPW nodes. They are also only somewhat more commonly in the -9..-1 range. While SoPW nodes are very much more often in the 0..9 range and only slightly more often in the 10..19 range.

So PMD nodes are more likely to be highly upvoted than SoPW nodes and somewhat more likely to be rather lightly downvoted.

So wherever this "PMDs get heavily downvoted" idea came from, it certainly doesn't appear to be accurate over the last year.

Never let the facts get in the way of a good yarn ;)

This is a great community so it's only natural that members of the community like to stay involved with it.

From all the discussions which have been held on this issue, the only thing one can conclude is that each and everyone use their voting powers as they like it.

Some people up/downvote for reasons which have nothing to do with the content of the node, but simply because they like/dislike the poster or because they are in a good/foul mood, or because they want to encourage/discourage similar nodes, or ...

As in all democratic systems where voting is done in secret, your conscience is the only judge and depending on the way you vote, you get the government / Monastery you deserve.

I'm confused by your title. What exactly did that have to do with your post?

P.S. downvoting ideas you don't want to see implemented and upvoting those you do is a fairly common practice here and I wouldn't take it personaly. I've posted many ideas, some get lots of -- and I then know that no one likes it. That is much easier for me to look at and understand than 100 replies all saying no in some way or other. If you are that concerned about your XP then you certianly missed something somewhere. Don't get me wrong, I like having XP and getting it, but the fear of loosing it has never stopped me from expressing an honest opinion. That same fear of loosing XP has made me think twice about what I write and stopped me from replying off the cuff a few times.

The point about votes on discussions is that it indicates the popularity of proposals (like yours here). (Update: this also means that PM discussions do indeed tend to attract more downvotes on average than the other categories, because many people here will vote down bad proposals to change the site, while most will ignore useless questions - for obvious reasons).

Sure if you propose something that's impopular you stand to lose some XP, but what the hell. Either you care enough to stand up for your ideas and try to convince people or you don't. It's not like you'll get banned or anything. Posting anonymously with a stupidly inflammatory title isn't going to help your cause anyway.

And yes, I do see your point about constructive criticism, but I don't think disabling voting on discussions will result in better proposals.

PS: For some reason most of the really down-voted proposals seem to be from people complaining about losing XP. Make of that what you will.

A distinction that works against your point is that we don't vote on monks, we vote on nodes. Monks don't have reputation, nodes do.

I understand that the reputation of my nodes is tied to my xp, but when I vote, I'm voting on the node, not the monk. There are poorly thought out replies in PMD just as there are technically inadequate answers in SoPW and I would still want to have the option of downvoting them. Also, upvoting or downvoting nodes by Anonymous Monk are still useful, as the good nodes get highlighted to the community and the bad nodes pointed out as well; this despite the fact that it has no impact on anyone's xp.

I certainly take your point that nodes should not be downvoted simply because of opposition to the opinion expressed. In my utopia this is accomplished by a culture of kindheartedness and lots of documentation rather than taking away the mechanism altogether or starting a flame war.

The voting system is currently being used for two orthogonal purposes: To indicate Node quality and to indicate agreement/disagreement.

I agree with the suggestion that dinging someone's XP if you simply disagree is not conducive to discussion.

As a solution, I propose adding a SURVEY OPTION in a node - that allows the author to add another set of radio buttons that indicate the degree of the reader's agreement with the author. Perhaps even multiple survey options, in case the author wants feedback on several issues.

I second this. It would be nice to be able to turn such a node easily into a (simplified) poll so that the people that want to vote whether they'd like to see the suggestion implemented or not, could do so without mixing their choice with their assessment of the node quality.

Jenda


Support Denmark! Defend the free world!

While I would not mind seeing that I'm not sure how likely it is to happen. I think the best course of action is to post the your public scratchpad or home node and then ask people in the chatterbox for advice. I have always found them helpful.

Looking at the reputations of nodes I've voted on in PerlMonks Discussion, I'm not seeing many downvotes*. Granted, it is a small sample.

Your suggestion is interesting, but I like simple systems and I'm not sure there is enough of a problem to make things more complicated for beginners (In addition to a bunch of voting/exp information to learn, new users now get thrown for a loop when they look at PerlMonks Discussion. I'd expect periodic SoPW questions and/or "Possible Bug?" reports about this).

Also, why worry so much about experience/reputation? It is, after all, just a number. Another way of thinking about it is, if your suggestion has attracted a flurry of up and down votes, you have struck upon something worth discussing :).

* - Not counting nodes with questions that have been brought up a bunch in the past, those collect downvotes pretty rapidly.

LOGICALLY THINKING there is no other way to interpret such behavior

1. Posts to the site are voted on based on content.
2. Content in PMD is judged based the quality of the post & whether or not monks agree with the proposal
3. Disliked proposals get a negative rep
4. Monks who aren't really really positive about the changes they want are discouraged by the possibility of a negative rep.
5. Proposals that monks aren't really confident in aren't posted because they fear negative rep
6. Bad proposals are stifled (maybe ;) )

How is this bad again? Stop stifling bad ideas!!!

Update: corrected horrible spelling errors.

Either you care enough to stand up for your ideas and try to convince people or you don't.

But with that said, sometimes the way a proposal is written impacts how it is viewed or maybe it needs to be refined. If you are worried about posting then ask for advice in the chatterbox first!!