Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
good chemistry is complicated,
and a little bit messy -LW
 
PerlMonks  

making editorial replies?

by jptxs (Curate)
on Jul 07, 2001 at 22:09 UTC ( #94750=monkdiscuss: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

OK. I hate to make YAFR (yet another feature request), but today I was reading Using # inside qw() and I thought to myself, "good question, has code, but the title could be better to help others find this when searching." I know I could make a request to the powers that be to change the title for that purpose, but it struck me that I'd rather be able to let the author know what I thought and why and see if s/he wanted to do that. Basically, I wished I could make a reply that was of an editorial nature. I could message the monk, or I could just make a normal reply. But it feels like I'd be cluttering an otherwise good pure perl strain with silly site related matters.

This node comes as a question. I want to know if anyone else finds themselves wanting to do this and also not doing it because it would just be noise in some senses. I want to also make it clear that this is NO slight on Chady - if anything I only had my thought because it was a good, well formed, on topic question that I think should be easily accessed through searches by other seeking wisdom. What do you think? Should there be a way to make replies that maybe only appear to the author? Should thre be two threads for every node? Am I just too bored today? =)

We speak the way we breathe. --Fugazi

Comment on making editorial replies?
Re: making editorial replies?
by Sherlock (Deacon) on Jul 07, 2001 at 23:48 UTC
    I think a simple way to handle such a situation would be to simply /msg the author of the node through the CB. That way, you're not cluttering up the post so that it remains clean for future reference. I think most authors would receive such requests pretty well. What you're really saying is, "I really liked your post and if you renamed it to this, or changed this, someone might find it in the future and find it as useful as I did." I know I'd be happy if I heard such a comment. Then, it's just a matter of the author editing the node on their own or requesting such a change to be made by one of the editors.

    - Sherlock

    Skepticism is the source of knowledge as much as knowledge is the source of skepticism.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: monkdiscuss [id://94750]
Approved by root
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others cooling their heels in the Monastery: (6)
As of 2014-07-26 11:55 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My favorite superfluous repetitious redundant duplicative phrase is:









    Results (176 votes), past polls