Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
P is for Practical
 
PerlMonks  

Perlmonks - democracy or oligarchy?

by tuique (Novice)
on Sep 05, 2002 at 21:55 UTC ( #195518=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: Newbies, trying to help, and where to draw the line?
in thread Newbies, trying to help, and where to draw the line?

Abigail-II, don't forget TMTOWTDI

What is your standard of correctness? What if someone disagrees with its definition? You express a view of PerlMonks that is oligarchic in nature--where a select group of powerful individuals is responsible for bestowing wisdom.

My response is, "But what about hubris", that characteristic to which none other than St. Larry himself attaches such import? Hubris is the democratic urge to raise oneself up to the gods, and at the monastery that is accomplished by posting.

It seems to me that in an unmoderated forum for sharing knowledge, it's more realistic to expect a process to occur in which members post, and reflect upon each others' postings. From this process a shared concensus will arise. Obviously poor posts will be quickly identified and labelled as such.

As others have mentioned, there is clear value in this process, over and apart from the value the initial requestor receives from having his or her singular problem addressed. It's democratic and it works.


Comment on Perlmonks - democracy or oligarchy?
•Re: Perlmonks - democracy or oligarchy?
by merlyn (Sage) on Sep 05, 2002 at 23:15 UTC
    Hubris is the democratic urge to raise oneself up to the gods, and at the monastery that is accomplished by posting.
    However, let us not do this at the expense of the people we are trying to help. A broken solution is a broken solution: to post such, is to attempt to raise yourself at the expense of others. I ask you to either not post, or post with qualifications, if there's a chance you are posting an ineffective solution.

    -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker

      Blinks

      A broken solution is a broken solution: to post such, is to attempt to raise yourself at the expense of others.

      No it is an attempt to help someone. Suggesting such is like suggesting we should punish a good smaritan for failing to save somebody. You can actually learn from a "bad" solution.

      Think about it. People here jump all over a person for really bad solutions. If they are serious about staying here, then they will think about it the next time.

      I ask you to either not post, or post with qualifications, if there's a chance you are posting an ineffective solution.

      Interesting choice of words. ineffective solution so basically if we are not up to your skill level, we should never answer a question?

      Maybe I am just blind but do people actually answer stuff knowing it is wrong?

        Suggesting such is like suggesting we should punish a good smaritan for failing to save somebody.
        Been there. Done that.

        if we are not up to your skill level, we should never answer a question?
        Darn it. Why does everyone always drag this point into the extreme? Ludicrous. NO, I am not saying that. Let me answer by addressing your following question:
        do people actually answer stuff knowing it is wrong?
        I don't think so. But I bet a lot of people have a hunch it is wrong or untested, but in their arrogance, don't mark it as such.

        That's all I'm asking, and I think that's reasonable.

        If you don't know for a fact, with certainty, that your posted answer works from personal experience, please mark it as "untested" or "a guess" or "passed along without verification". When you mark your answer like that, I can determine to distrust the possible answer, not distrust you for either lying to me out of arrogance, or out of your own inability to determine your certainty of fact.

        And you really don't want me or others distrusting you, right?

        That's really all I'm saying. Don't read more into it than that. I'm just arguing for proper disclosure.

        -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker

      In this place someone submitting a broken solution is just asking to get their head blown clean off. Frankly, I learn as much from the dogpile after a bad response as just about anything here.
      ()-()
       \"/
        `                                                     
      
Re: Perlmonks - democracy or oligarchy?
by mojobozo (Monk) on Sep 06, 2002 at 15:30 UTC
         Hubris is the democratic urge to raise oneself up to the gods

    Well, actually, dictionary.com serves it up thusly:
    hu·bris Pronunciation Key (hybrs) also hy·bris (h-) n. Overbearing pride or presumption; arrogance: “There is no safety in un +limited technological hubris” (McGeorge Bundy).

    mb

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://195518]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others surveying the Monastery: (16)
As of 2014-07-30 17:11 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My favorite superfluous repetitious redundant duplicative phrase is:









    Results (237 votes), past polls