Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
We don't bite newbies here... much
 
PerlMonks  

Why was node 740649 reaped ?

by syphilis (Canon)
on Feb 02, 2009 at 13:07 UTC ( #740686=monkdiscuss: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

Hi,
The suggestion at Reference to a reference is that the node was reaped because marto reckoned it was a duplication of Memory leak ... but I don't perceive any duplication there.

Cheers,
Rob

Comment on Why was node 740649 reaped ?
Re: Why was node 740649 reaped ?
by jdporter (Canon) on Feb 02, 2009 at 15:10 UTC
    I'm with you, syphilis. It doesn't look like a dup of anything to me.
Re: Why was node 740649 reaped ?
by Tanktalus (Canon) on Feb 02, 2009 at 15:18 UTC

    Your subject asks why, so I'm going to answer somewhat literally. May not be the answer you were looking for.

    Likelihood #1: people saw the reason, saw who alleged it, and accepted it on face value given the simplicity of the original node, and just voted to reap without seeing the dupe. After all, if you've seen one of a dupe, you've seen 'em all.

    Likelihood #2: people saw the reason, tried to go to the other node, but when the link was malformed, gave up and ignored the node (giving more weight to the first group).

    Likelihood #3: people saw the reason, tried to go to the other node, but when the link was malformed, typed the number into the search bar, got there, and were confused as to what was going on. This left them in a state of shock where they just didn't go back to the moderated node to vote "keep".

    In reality, I think it was mostly #1 - because that's easy and fast, it probably didn't take very long for the node in question to be reaped.

    Personally, I would have voted merely to ensure it wasn't approved, if such a vote were available. The node has little value, especially when combined with the earlier node it was alleged to be a dupe of, as the petitioner did not seem to follow the advice of the earlier node (which makes it somewhat of a dupe: ask a different question, but still get the same answer: "How (not) to ask a question" - but that's a dupe of the answer, not the question, which is what How (not) to ask a question was written in the first place, I think). And maybe others had a similar desire, which gave them too much apathy to vote to keep.

Re: Why was node 740649 reaped ?
by MidLifeXis (Prior) on Feb 02, 2009 at 17:53 UTC

    Just for completeness, it looks like the node has been restored.

    --MidLifeXis

      Whoops, sorry - I should've left a message myself!

Re: Why was node 740649 reaped ?
by marto (Bishop) on Feb 02, 2009 at 20:31 UTC

    Apologies for any inconvenience, I messed up earlier today when I moderated the node in question.

    Martin

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: monkdiscuss [id://740686]
Approved by planetscape
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others pondering the Monastery: (14)
As of 2014-12-22 21:37 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    Is guessing a good strategy for surviving in the IT business?





    Results (131 votes), past polls