Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
more useful options

Perl Monks Discussion

( #1040=superdoc: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

This section is only for discussing issues pertaining to the PerlMonks web site. You can ask about how things work, or offer ideas on how the site could be improved, for example.

Unless the topic pertains to the PerlMonks web site, it does not belong in this section. If you're unsure, check out Where should I post X? and The Perl Monks Guide to the Monastery, or ask in the chatterbox.

PerlMonks Discussions
Having our anonymous cake and eating it too
9 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
by pemungkah
on Jan 23, 2014 at 00:52
    I mentioned this in another thread, and Anonymous Monk kindly suggested I float it in its own thread - so here we go.

    The problem at hand re anonymous users is that some people really really love Anonymous Monk, and others really really don't. There are certainly folks who are very vocal about this both ways and who continue to be; the consensus has always been either anonymous posting must completely stop forever and the Anonymous Monk be eliminated, or anonymous posting must be left as it is because it is too difficult to do anything about it.

    I'd like to propose a possibility that might let both sides of this discussion have what they want - it it obvious that there is at least some dissatisfaction with anonymous posting as-is, and it's also obvious that we're not going to eliminate a feature which is very popular with many.

    (Those who understand the internals of the Perlmonks engine, bear with me; I've not seen the code, so I do not yet know if this is feasible. If I'm incorrect, let's talk it over and see if the concept is something we can work with, even if my specific implementation guesses are not.)


    1. We keep the Anonymous Monk. This is, from much reading here, not negotiable.
    2. There are, from time to time, personality conflicts among the members of this site. This is simply a fact.
    3. At times, some people may not want to see postings from others, either selectively, or at all.
    4. Any proposed solution must not alter the current functionality's default operation.
    5. Any suggestion must be as small as possible a change.
    This seems like a difficult set of criteria to meet without altering the most basic characteristics of the users - but let's look at this from a different angle. What if we made "allow anonymous users to respond" to be a characteristic of a node instead?

    We'd default this characteristic to be on unless turned off. If turned off, all child nodes of this node would inherit the characteristic (whether by data inheritance or plain old copying is an implementation detail - suffice it to say that the characteristic would be added to each node, and only the first node in a new thread would have the option of setting this characteristic - for simplicity, if you started out open, you don't get to "take it back"). All child nodes would retain the parent's characteristic, and would not be allowed to alter it. However, if node characteristics are truly inheritable from a root-of-thread node, then "taking it back" is possible (what is my root node's current "allow anonymous" setting?), and a nice thing to permit. I do not think nodes should be pruned if this setting is changed; that adds too much complication.

    Alternatively, each top node could have a pointer to the originator's "block list". Checking a "no anonymous replies" checkbox in your home node adds the Anonymous Monk to this list; a secondary input field/page in the user's home node settings would allow them to add other ids to the block list (probably stored as home node IDs). Each new thread would copy/inherit the block list from the user to the root node - probably copy, as we don't want the changes to propagate across large swaths of the database if someone posts a lot then alters their block list. Each subsequent child node would continue to receive this block list.

    Users who did not want to block the anonymous monk would leave the box unchecked (and if the block list exists, would have an empty block list); this allows them to use Perlmonks in the style to which they are accustomed.

    Users who want to block other monks (whoever this might be) would add them to their block list (or check the box), and they would no longer have to see posts from those monks. Blocked monks would receive a polite "monk prefers not to see your posts, sorry" message when trying to post to a node/thread on which they are blocked.

    Considerations should not be blockable; I'm on the fence about votes. Needs discussion to tease out the positives and negatives here.

    Let's please not simply say declare it impossible; let's think about it and see if we can partly do it if the whole idea doesn't work. If there are architectural issues, let's look at them and see if there are any further ideas that might let us move forward in a different way with the same kind of function.

    It just comes down to each monk being allowed to control what they wish to read, which is a reasonable goal. Let's see if we can find a way to meet it. I am more than happy to do (and capable of doing) work to make this happen.

Add social networks to home nodes
2 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
by Lady_Aleena
on Jan 20, 2014 at 14:10

    Recently I was asked by another monk for a Twitter to PerlMonks user handle decoder. I would love to be able to store my social network user names by my avatar instead of mixing it in with the text of my profile. Also, if a Monk fills in those fields, it might also be nice for a meta page with a list like Monks with Twitter accounts.

    Google+LadyAleena Noyb

    Facebook, Linkdin, etc. can be optional fields too with the accompanying "Monks with X accounts" pages. Just a thought.

    No matter how hysterical I get, my problems are not time sensitive. So, relax, have a cookie, and a very nice day!
    Lady Aleena
Deflation and "Selected Best Nodes"
9 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
by LanX
on Jan 07, 2014 at 10:16
    Hello Brothers

    when bored I start reading and enjoying the wisdom of "Selected Best Nodes of All Time, 50 of the top 2000 nodes"!

    I don't know if I'm the only one noticing¹ but it's pretty difficult to find nodes written after 2006!

    As I'm looking at it now the last node N° 50 is "DNA is Life" with 99 upvotes, which pretty much explains the phenomenon.

    It's the deflation (the opposite of inflation) of votes in the last years. IAW votes were "cheaper" back then.

    The best node of 2013 apparently was " : get your perlmonks flair!" with 87 votes.

    I certainly doubt that the loss of monks or votes in the last years represents a decline of quality.

    My suggestion (IFF easily realized!) is to select the nodes after multiplying a antiproportional weight factor which is derived from either average votes or maximum votes in the corresponding year.

    This is far from being urgent, I just thought it might be worth noting, that ATM "selected best nodes" only represents the far past of the community.

    Cheers Rolf

    ( addicted to the Perl Programming Language)

    PS: another factor could be that old posts had more time collecting votes, I don't have the necessary statistical data to check. Anyway it's still strange if this only applies to nodes written prior to 2006.


    ¹) older discussions to the same topic:

Assigning unique identifiers within a discussion thread to each distinct anonymous commenter
16 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
by PopeFelix
on Jan 02, 2014 at 13:12

    Recent discussion in the CB has turned to the topic of Anonymous Monks, and the utility of anonymity on this site. Arguing against anonymity, Jim said, "... you can't distinguish one [Anonymous Monk] from another [Anonymous Monk] in any given thread. You can't have a reasoned argument with someone when that someone is an amorphous blob that can't be differentiated from other instances of the same amorphous blob."

    As an answer to this, what about differentiating AM's in a given thread by calling them "Anonymous Monk 1", "Anonymous Monk 2", etc.? I.E., in a given thread, we'd assign a unique identifier to each distinct anonymous commenter. That would preserve the anonymity of the commenter, both within the PM website and to the outside world, while at the same time allowing commenters (both anonymous and otherwise) to distinguish between and cogently reply to different AM's in a thread.

    I won't go into the details of implementation here; that's up to the maintainers.

Posting tips no longer appear after previewing SoPW posts
2 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
by kcott
on Dec 28, 2013 at 18:03

    G'day Monks,

    There's a series of tips that appear after the <textarea> where you type your post:

    I just replied to a Seekers of Perl Wisdom question. The tips were there initially but they had disappeared after hitting the [preview] button. [I retested this to confirm.]

    While composing this node (in PerlMonks Discussion), they are there both before and after previewing.

    Potentially just a problem with Seekers of Perl Wisdom. I haven't investigated any other sections.

    -- Ken

RFC: Things to ask yourself before posting a question on PerlMonks
6 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
by taint
on Dec 11, 2013 at 10:26
    Greetings Monks

    I just happened upon a node that was recycled into a different context. I have no Idea how, or why it happened. But in it's current context/format; reads like a --

    Things to ask yourself before posting a question on PerlMonks

    As such. I think it's a perfect candidate for a section in the PerlMonks FAQ. Titled, as I've done so here, in this post. For reference, see have synax error in this coding?. Which I, and an Anonymous Monk, also show where the original post lives.

    Thank you for your consideration.


    UPDATE: I reversed the reference to the post I intended to point, with the reference to the original post -- thanks jdporter
    Yes. What say about me, is true.
Request for an update to: What shortcuts can I use for linking to other information?
2 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
by taint
on Dec 03, 2013 at 12:19

    Greetings, Monks. I recently had a "shoot out" with marto. I think we both had valid points. It all stemmed from the shortcut link to the FreeBSD man pages (note I didn't just link man to the man pages ;)

    Point(s) were. I assumed, that because the link was to the FreeBSD man pages, that the returned results would be from the FreeBSD commands. But (counter intuitively) they are to SuSE Linux. This came as a bit of a shock to me. As the link to the PerlMonks short cuts page
    What shortcuts can I use for linking to other information?

    Unix man pages: A specific command: [man://command name] Search form: [man://] (no args)
    makes no mention that the links points to Linux versions of the commands. But rather, indicates they're UNIX man pages.

    Personally, I find/found this to be a bit counter intuitive. As such, I'd like to purpose an addition to that section. That clarifies the expected return results. eg; man pages for SuSE Linux.

    Not particularly a big deal. But seems that it would be more intuitive, if users knew in advance that the results weren't necessarily from FreeBSD, even tho the link points there.

    Well. Thanks for your consideration, and best wishes.


    UPDATE; converted quoted node id, to proper link via [id://]

    #!/usr/bin/perl -Tw
    use Perl::Always or die;
    my $perl_version = (5.12.5);
    print $perl_version;
A thought for the leader on SOPW
1 direct reply — Read more / Contribute
by taint
on Nov 27, 2013 at 10:12

    ASCII is an endangered species. Choose your characters wisely.


    #!/usr/bin/perl -Tw
    use Perl::Always or die;
    my $perl_version = (5.12.5);
    print $perl_version;
approved chatter tags allows blink, remove it?
6 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
by BlinkingLanX
on Nov 26, 2013 at 22:49
Would it make any sense to add "graduation announcement(s)" in the nodelets?
5 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
by taint
on Nov 25, 2013 at 17:06

    Just a thought. But I wondered how it might be received to have announcements in the nodelets area,. That scrolled up, much like the CB does. But with announcements of the PerlMonks users that have just graduated to a higher level. It seems fitting of the theme, and times; hoisting a tankard to a fellow Monk who has just graduated to a higher level. I dunno. Just a thought. I thought it might attract people, or possibly be well received.


    #!/usr/bin/perl -Tw
    use Perl::Always or die;
    my $perl_version = (5.12.5);
    print $perl_version;
How do I link to an internal target on CPAN?
3 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
by roboticus
on Nov 25, 2013 at 10:59
I apologize for yesterday's downtime
10 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
by ambrus
on Nov 16, 2013 at 15:36

    For more than three hours yesterday, the Perlmonks website was broken: it was impossible to post any new writeup. It was me who caused this downtime by urging Corion to apply a particular pmdev patch I wrote, when that patch had a bug. I hereby apologize to all monks.

    The details. The downtime lasted between approximately 2013-11-15 15:00 UTC to 2013-11-15 18:45 UTC. The patch was looksLikeSpam - (patch).

[solved] SOPW buggy? test for cf006
1 direct reply — Read more / Contribute
by LanX
on Nov 04, 2013 at 06:43
Misplaced node
3 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
by Athanasius
on Nov 03, 2013 at 07:03
Broken (or possibly outdated) links in editor lists (2013-10-25)
2 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
by atcroft
on Oct 25, 2013 at 01:07

    A few nights ago, I went looking to find other options in the way of editors to try out. I found links to Code Editors and Development Environments and Perl Development Tools, and began opening links to see what each was about. I found several links, however, that appear to have suffered bit-rot, and thought I should bring it to someone's attention. Where I could, I have tried also to find or suggest updated or possibly better links.

    Hope this information proves helpful. Your thoughts?

    Update: 2013-10-25
    Wrap list in readmore tags, due to length/appearance on section page.

Discussion Item
Give us your input:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post; it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":

  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • Outside of code tags, you may need to use entities for some characters:
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.
  • Log In?

    What's my password?
    Create A New User
    and the web crawler heard nothing...

    How do I use this? | Other CB clients
    Other Users?
    Others exploiting the Monastery: (12)
    As of 2014-10-22 08:51 GMT
    Find Nodes?
      Voting Booth?

      For retirement, I am banking on:

      Results (114 votes), past polls