But we aren't supposed to consider nodes to be moved to Tutorials. It is just a bad habit (meme, if you prefer) that hasn't been stomped out yet. Nodes not written with the intent of being tutorials usually make for lousy tutorials. And a section called "Tutorials" that has too many impressive nodes that are lousy tutorials, doesn't serve its purpose very well.

In the mean time, if you find a node that particularly impresses you, put a link to it on your home node. You can make what ever sections you like in such a list of links...

If it also would work well as a tutorial, then /msg the author asking them to repost the node as a tutorial (using the form meant for that which can be found via the Tutorials section) and to provide links between the two nodes. This way people can still find the original thread in the section it was approved into, the original node can remain relatively untouched so the following discussion makes sense in historical conext, the author can incorporate the important points from the thread into the updated tutorial, we can some day give ownership of the tutorial to someone else when an update is called for by someone other than the original author, etc.

And if you really want voting, then you want automatic inclusion based on the votes, which isn't how Tutorials works. And I really think the only way this will happen is if someone implements a voting scheme and manages to actually make it work, where nice lists of nodes are produced. When that happens, PerlMonks will link to that (external) system.

Maybe one day we'll have some more-limited special votes for picking 'best of' nodes of specific types (funny, instructive, innovative, ...), but I doubt 'obfu art' will make that cut (and I'm not holding my breath anyway)...