I think you're missing the point.

XP is not, and never has been, about knowledge. We don't give out XP based on your perl knowledge. If that were the case, TimToady would be at infinity, merlyn would be somewhere nearby - maybe half or three quarters TimToady's total, chromatic, brian d foy, and even robin and many others would be somewhere close to merlyn, and I would be at less than half my current total.

XP is about participation. We give out XP for:

• Using all your votes for the day (for the first few levels).
• Voting at all (25% of the time)
• Just showing up (25% of the time)
• Writing nodes which others deem a positive contribution to the site through their votes in favour.

We even take away XP for writing nodes which others deem a negative contribution (sometimes - a rate that is variable), or, as of somewhat recently, spending all your time downvoting, both of which is deemed worse than simply not showing up.

Your level is solely a representation of your participation. It has nothing to do with your perl knowledge and people need to stop confusing the two. Just because I'm in the top 50 of the Saints in our Book does not mean I know more about perl than others lower on the list (or not on the list at all). For example, check TimToady's rank. And just because someone is above me on the list doesn't mean they can't be wrong, either.

The reason why thinking this way is bad is simple. People who have something to contribute, like you, curtail their own participation. What keeps this site going is participation, and you're curtailing it! Instead, we would prefer you to participate to your fullest (which doesn't necessarily mean checking PM every 5 minutes, either), and let the XP flow as it is intended: as a game that vaguely represents participation, not knowledge. You may even find that you learn more about perl in the process.