|Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister|
Comment onby gods
|on Feb 11, 2000 at 00:06 UTC||Need Help??|
Some of these comments are very picky... I worked as a text editor1 for some time. Your mileage may vary.
I would modify the first sentence to "...may be unfamiliar with online forums in general, or sites based on the Everything engine in particular." (I think the number of people completely ignorant of online forums who would actually find us is probably low, but there are various differences particular to this site.)
I agree that the "no stupid questions, just stupid answers" comes off wrong, but am at a loss how to correct it and keep the "feel".
In #3, I would reword to "PerlMonks has its own Questions and Answers section, which has a slightly different focus than the official Perl FAQ. Most common perl coding problems are addressed in these two Frequently Asked Questions documents." (one reason for this is to avoid the confusion of so many different FAQs -- thanks for not mentioning the Perl Monks Site FAQ, which would have sent this completely overboard. Also, a document doesn't "contain" a slant, it "has" one. I changed to "focus", since "slant" is often seen as a negative term.)
In #6, a tiny change: "...home nodes of our resident gurus. They are as eclectic..." and maybe add Outside Links to the extensive link lists.
1. No, I wasn't vi or emacs in a previous life.
Update: Fixed typo. Thanks, Vynce.