in reply to XP problem

I don't quite see your problem - but then again, maybe it's because I know/have heard of (most of) the various ranks designated by his popeness.

I'm of the opinion that the orders of magnitude difference between himself and the rest of this wonderful enclave ably serves to demonstrate the sense of humour with which he, (the vroom), has been blessed ;-)

Personally, I use the monastry for 2, related, reasons:

From an XP POV, I find it useful in trying to identify the stuff in which other monks are/maybe interested - the more XP, the more interest ?! Not that that has prevented me from expounding my views on a number of (mostly Windoze related) topics, but as opinions, the XP isn't of any where as much interest on such nodes.

And as for life after popehood, maybe you should ask BrowserUk about it - once he's finished his meteoric rise to such heights - which, as has been observed elsewhere, might not be that long in arriving ... long live the revolution :D)

A user level that continues to overstate my experience :-))

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: XP problem
by GrandFather (Saint) on Feb 22, 2009 at 01:58 UTC

    You seem to be confusing reputation and XP. Nodes gain/lose reputation, monks gain/lose XP.

    Reputation is a measure of the degree to which other monks esteem a node and is an indication of its worth to the site. XP is an index of the degree of participation in PerlMonks which may be dominated by XP earned through node contributions, or may be dominated by XP earned through showing up every day and voting.

    Votes cast for nodes influence XP to the extent that up votes may increase the author's XP and down votes may decrease the author's XP so to that extent a node's reputation adjusts an authors XP.

    True laziness is hard work
      TFT GrandFather ,

      Given your most eloquent, but concise, explanation, you may, indeed be right about my confusion - however, given that confusion is (seemingly) exponentially proportional to age, I claim that [age] as my excuse:-)

      I notice that your description of voting (potentially) being a measure of site participation could be misconstrued as incitement to vote (either way) - irrespective of whether one [a vote] is merited or not.

      Personally, I only vote a node up if the node has brought enlightenment to me, I think it might bring enlightenment to others, if it amuses me or if the content annoys me, I'll vote the node down.

      A user level that continues to overstate my experience :-))

        Experience is supposed to be somewhat proportional to age so your sig is in contradiction with your excuse ;-)

        XP is indeed set up in part to encourage voting but (mostly) doesn't dictate how or on what criteria people vote.

        Voting a node down because it amuses you is probably fairly unusual (I'll try not to be amusing here). Voting a node down because it is annoying is probably fairly common, but may not be a good criteria - an annoying node can be correct and enlightening.

        True laziness is hard work