|
in reply to Re: We should elminate: Anonymous, and DOWN-voting
in thread We should elminate: Anonymous, and DOWN-voting
Yes; but that's the point. If the node is written by Anonymous Monk then you can downvote it without even reading it, if you so choose. You don't even have to think about whether you like the poster or if he's done better at another time. You just click -- and it's Problem Solved.
If nobody could post anonymously, then the same people would continue to lazy-post... but I at least would have to think twice before downvoting, perhaps even give the post the courtesy of a read. That would really waste our time.
Feste: Misprison in the highest degree. Lady, cucullus non facit monachum. That's as much to say as, I wear not motley in my brain....
|
Re^3: We should elminate: Anonymous, and DOWN-voting
by Anonymous Monk on Dec 04, 2011 at 08:30 UTC
|
If down-voting entailed a risk, people would not be so quick to judge. | [reply] |
|
|
If your goal is to have people not judge quickly, shouldn't the same risk be entailed to *any* vote, whether it's a down-vote or an up-vote?
How about this: all votes you make are public. Anyone can challenge your vote in the 24 hours following your vote. Once your vote has been challenged, you got 24 hours to write down the motivation behind it. People get to vote on that. If that doesn't attract enough up votes more than it has down votes, you lose. The first time you lose, you lose all your XP (and become leve 1 again). The second time you lose, you lose your posting rights for a year. The third time, Vroom comes over, pulls out your nails, kills your dog, sets your house on fire, slashes the tires from your truck, and sells your kids into slavery.
That ought to stop voting. So no more down votes.
| [reply] |
|
|
I don't see any point in risks being applied to up-votes, they are merely an extension of the principle of free association and mutual collaboration, down-votes of course being the exact opposite of that.
| [reply] |
|
|
|
|
I don't know about going that far, but it would be nice to be able to see people's voting history. I'm not a big fan of anonymous hotlines in real life, and I'm not a fan of people downvoting anonymously because their precious egos got hurt. For that matter, upvoting crap posts just because people are lazy and want their daily points without spending any time thinking about it is a big problem here too. I've seen totally horrible code that doesn't even work get a positive rating, or one-line posts at the start of a thread get higher ratings than posts a little further down with a full, well-coded solution that probably took 20-30 minutes to work out.
People's votes should be visible, you should have to type in a short reason as to why you're making your vote, and if the site mods downvote a post, anyone who upvoted that post should lose a point. Site mod vote display would of course be delayed several days, as would the loss of points, so people can't just see which way the wind is blowing and switch votes. This would make some people think a lot more carefully before they downvote or upvote.
| [reply] |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
If down-voting entailed a risk, people would not be so quick to judge. Sure, except down-voting already does entails a risk
| [reply] |
|
|
| [reply] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
