in reply to Re: Troll Warning
in thread Troll Warning
My objection to your suggestion is that it's not workable. By that I mean it's not being done, and you've proposed no change to cause it to happen. Sure, people could do it, and probably some do, but enough of them aren't that trolls continue to get big responses.
Caution: Contents may have been coded under pressure.
One reason your suggestion isn't being followed is that it's cumbersome. It's also non-obvious. You're asking people to navigate (without providing a nearby link) to another page to take an action on the current one. It's simply not going to catch on, particularly among the less-experienced.
We could provide a link to Worst Nodes on every post that has made the list, but that would be a badge, which I'm trying to avoid. It would also be kind of harsh to the people whose posts are at -1 or -2.
Isn't our Consideration Process fully capable of labeling troll-ish posts?I don't know what you're referring to. There's no labeling option in consideration.
Caution: Contents may have been coded under pressure.
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re^3: Troll Warning
by jeffa (Bishop) on Nov 17, 2005 at 23:04 UTC | |
by Roy Johnson (Monsignor) on Nov 17, 2005 at 23:31 UTC | |
Re^3: Troll Warning
by fokat (Deacon) on Nov 18, 2005 at 15:21 UTC | |
by Roy Johnson (Monsignor) on Nov 18, 2005 at 15:36 UTC |
In Section
Perl Monks Discussion