Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Welcome to the Monastery
 
PerlMonks  

Re^2: In need of guidance

by luis.roca (Deacon)
on Feb 06, 2012 at 00:48 UTC ( #952008=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: In need of guidance
in thread In need of guidance

Why approve something you...

  1. didn't bother to finish reading?
  2. didn't think met the standards you feel SoPWs should?
  3. weren't willing to try and correct it FIRST by sending the OP a private /msg?

Instead you decided to continue your pastime of publicly shaming new members when their (often very first question) doesn't stack up to your standards. Is it really necessary to consistently play "Kick the Newbie" several times a week week after week? Maybe I'm in the minority, but I really don't think it is. Yet you continue to do so when it doesn't seem to have the end result you claim to be trying to accomplish (Improving the quality of questions from new members).

I honestly don't see a whole lot wrong with the OP's question and thought it had potential to start an interesting discussion. Is it a great question? No. But if asking great questions is favored over assisting people with their (Perl) programming problems what's the point? There were numerous, far more helpful answers you could have given the OP. All they asked for was some help with brainstorming. If you couldn't think of ideas, didn't find the question interesting or to your standards PLEASE IGNORE IT.


"...the adversities born of well-placed thoughts should be considered mercies rather than misfortunes." Don Quixote


Comment on Re^2: In need of guidance
Re^3: In need of guidance
by ww (Bishop) on Feb 06, 2012 at 01:20 UTC
    1. False 2 and 3: true

    As he knows, I greatly admire much of what luis.roca has done in his brief tenure as a Monk. Hence, for him, a more detailed reply has been provided by message.

    Of course, that has the defect of restricting the positions I expressed to the addressee only (unless he decides to post the messages, of course), which would be admirable in terms of laying those out for future readers -- who may or may not agree -- but the defect of laying the writer our to public shaming for use of abbreviations, loose language, etc, to convey those ideas in a limited message box.

    The essence of my reply -- in my view -- is that it offers several constructive suggestions, in language which may be direct enough to penetrate the skull of an OP who chose to make NO visible effort on his own.

      It would be interesting to see when was the last time you posted a solution to an OP, rather than just commentary upon the form of their question.

      From the OP:

      "My current project idea is to make another music organizer/cleaner, the difference is that for those unrecognized/unnamed songs it should use a "Music Recognition Software" to name the song correctly and set also an album picture on every faceless song, all thanks to music recognition which i still need to find. I approached the monastery gates in look for some answers for my project, but i still accept wisdom words."

      I'm failing to see where in your first reply this was addressed or even how it was addressed in a way others hadn't done so already?

      "Of course, that has the defect of restricting the positions I expressed to the addressee only (unless he decides to post the messages, of course), which would be admirable in terms of laying those out for future readers -- who may or may not agree -- but the defect of laying the writer our to public shaming for use of abbreviations, loose language, etc, to convey those ideas in a limited message box."

      If you would like to display what you sent me via private /msg please do so, however I don't see how that burden should fall to me. I also find it odd that you would highlight how you decided to /msg me given it seems you find it an ineffective method with SoPW posters. Personally I don't see how it takes that much more effort to correct an OP via private /msg than to essentially write replies with the same theme over and over again.

      "The essence of my reply -- in my view -- is that it offers several constructive suggestions, in language which may be direct enough to penetrate the skull of an OP who chose to make NO visible effort on his own."

      Yes we strongly disagree here. I have not noticed any improvement in the quality of new member SoPWs in, as you say, the brief time I've been here using your tactic (Again, I know it's not *just* you but you do seem to be one of the most consistently vocal on this issue). I also think that while a question may not be perfect, that does not mean the thread will be of poor quality as well. There are many examples of threads improving when given a chance. If monks find the topic interesting, they will contribute and many times it will end up making for a great thread.

      Why stifle that with a "Hey Newbie! You stink at asking questions! Read our rules or GO AWAY!" type of reply? I'm NOT saying to give people a free pass, just lay off the bashing. If you don't have something to contribute to the topic then ignore it. If others have already scolded the OP don't add to it. If the OP hasn't been scolded, hold off until someone else can help them or they've had a chance to correct the mistakes. (Again, if you feel strongly about it /msg them). Certainly DON'T approve a thread you think was poorly written just so you can have a chance for everyone to see your reply bashing the new kid.


      "...the adversities born of well-placed thoughts should be considered mercies rather than misfortunes." Don Quixote

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://952008]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others browsing the Monastery: (9)
As of 2014-07-30 08:08 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My favorite superfluous repetitious redundant duplicative phrase is:









    Results (229 votes), past polls