Re: [OT] How about an Off Topic Section? (take my meds... please)

[tye]

Meditations is maybe getting about 2 posts each week of late. Just widen its charter to be as off-topic as is being called for (though I'm not sure there is actually agreement on that point even just within the posts from proponents in this thread).

Though I don't believe that nor a new section would actually solve anything. You can declare that talking about things related to doing your work with Perl are not off-topic and even document that in official site documentation, but that won't stop (hasn't stopped) all people from being little usenet topic purity nazis. Just because the section says it is for stuff that is off-topic doesn't mean you won't still have a bunch of people who object to any particular bit of drivel and do various things to discourage such, like is already being done (I predict).

Isn't it even on some FAQ list that one should usually avoid trying to solve social problems with technical solutions? The problem appears to be the occasional "that's off-topic" whine being perceived as a serious problem. Sounds mostly like two social problems. :)

I'm a bit shocked that several people have expressed a complete failure at imagining how anything undesirable could ever result from removing all discouragement from posting anything no matter how wildly off-topic (or the somewhat less ambitious change that they in particular see as being proposed).

One of the primary motivations for the desire for this new section was the expression that the audience here is a very good audience. Do y'all really lack the imagination to see how radically changing the breadth of the subject matter being discussed could have a significant impact on the types of material posted and thus the types of people posting said material and thus, with time, the entire audience composition?

Personally, I think "anything goes" is just folly. I have some pointed questions about current US politics, some others about just certain religions, and a few about certain practices that are mostly not discussed in polite company. I suspect sequestering those in a separate section will work about as well as augmenting your social club in an older part of downtown with a "Free Beer" sign and then achieving sequestration by adding "(only upstairs)".

I've long been in favor of allowing even encouraging posts that are only fairly tangentially related to work one is doing with Perl. I'm still in favor of that. And I think those should go in Seekers of Perl Wisdom (the "-Related" is implied). Yes, that includes asking about the javascript that you are using with some Perl stuff, even though the javascript problem likely is not in the least Perl-specific and asking about setting up your ssh keys that you use to log in to the host where you run your Perl code.

How closely or tangentially related is indeed a matter of judgement. I quite dislike a knee-jerk gainsaying of "that is not Perl related, go away". I don't mind a well-considered comment noting that a question is far enough afield from Perl that one might get a better or faster answer elsewhere, especially when a link to a specific "elsewhere" is provided and especially especially when it is part of a node that also contains something useful or interesting in reply to the root matter (not just the "meta" reply of where you might or might not get a good reply).

The frequency, likelihood, and severity of the "that seems rather off-topic" push-back that one gets should fall on a sliding scale that serves to give a variable level of discouragement to prospective posters of questions. A rather extremely off-the-topic-of-Perl question might still be posted based on other mitigating factors like the problem being extremely interesting, for example. While questions about the intersection of race and law enforcement practices are likely mostly avoided, even when Perl is somehow directly involved.

I think a better approach would be rooting out places in the site UI and documentation that give topic purists encouragement and making sure there is a site document clearly spelling out that "topics related to working with Perl are welcome", at least as a starting point. If, after a time, that is insufficient latitude for off-topicness in the community's eyes, then broaden it further. If the community starts to perceive an unwelcome drift, then narrow it a bit.

[BrowserUk]

I think a better approach would be rooting out places in the site UI and documentation that give topic purists encouragement and making sure there is a site document clearly spelling out that "topics related to working with Perl are welcome", at least as a starting point.

Sanity! I still prefer the OT section solution; but a clear mandate that programming related subject on the fringes of being Perl-related would go a long way to mitigating for its absence.

And I agree with pretty much everything you said with regard to the need for some restrictions; and the areas where those restrictions are required.

[Anonymous Monk]

'I still prefer the OT section solution'

That is not a solution. That is called an opinion. Stop mincing words just to get your way. You've had your say and you'll continue to have your say ... which is what makes you look like a tryhard. Why you tryhard, bully?

[Anonymous Monk]

BullyUk ... that is very fitting!

"I have no social life so I push my intellect on everyone."

[aaron_baugher]

I quite dislike a knee-jerk gainsaying of "that is not Perl related, go away". I don't mind a well-considered comment noting that a question is far enough afield from Perl that one might get a better or faster answer elsewhere [...]

I think a better approach would be rooting out places in the site UI and documentation that give topic purists encouragement and making sure there is a site document clearly spelling out that "topics related to working with Perl are welcome", at least as a starting point.

I agree with everything you said, but especially with these two points. Considering the generally helpful and open attitude here, I'm frankly puzzled sometimes by the rudeness (usually posted anonymously) that's shown toward newcomers who appear to be honestly ignorant of how Perl-unrelated their problems are, especially as contrasted with the tolerance that's shown toward some other kinds of posts. But in any case, there seem to be plenty of topic monitors to prevent the site from taking off into endless threads about politics and favorite spaghetti recipes.

I use RSS to keep up with new posts, so the "schema" is meaningless to me; there could be one big category or a hundred little ones and I wouldn't notice. So from that perspective, the question isn't whether there should be an off-topic area, but whether off-topic posts should be censored as harshly as they have been so far.

There are two very different kinds of off-topic posts that we could be talking about (not counting obvious spam and attacks):

• A newbie has been programming for a month and was tossed into a task involving Perl, Javascript, HTML, Apache control files, and possibly a couple of other things, and he has no idea where the problem lies. He thinks (or hopes) he's on-topic, but he isn't. There are two possible responses (other than being a jerk):
  1. Politely tell him his problem isn't with Perl, so he'll need to go elsewhere. Point him in the right direction if it's not much trouble.

  2. Allow the post and try to help him with his non-Perl problem if you can.

  Those are both reasonable; which a forum follows is just a matter of policy. The policy could even be left open to each member's discretion: help them if you want, point them somewhere else if you want, but otherwise ignore them.

• The regulars have gotten to know each other and formed friendships and learned to respect each other's knowledge beyond Perl, and they'd like to talk to each other about non-Perl topics. This is common on long-standing forums that don't have strict topical requirements. It's not a question of right or wrong, but simply what the people in charge of the forum (the members, if it's a democracy) want the forum to be like. There are three main places they can draw the line:
  1. Censor it all.

  2. Allow anything.

  3. Censor it somewhat -- in this case perhaps to topics only a step or two away from Perl, like installing an operating system or dealing with a difficult boss at your programming job.

  #2 here is almost certainly a bad idea. #3 seems most reasonable to me, and not too hard to define. There would always be the option of going back to #1 if it doesn't go well.

[tye]

but whether off-topic posts should be censored as harshly as they have been so far

I guess I read different posts than you.

First, I can't recall a single recent posting that I would characterize as having been "censored harshly".

Second, in the quick scan of recent nodes marked "OT", I found plenty of cases of both of the categories you called out. Many from the first category included replies as described under your item "2". Many from the second category had hardly a hint of Perl involved (but they were the types of questions that people who do a lot of Perl programming are fairly likely to have some interest in).

So, just read different threads or shift which ones you have stronger recall of and the problem you perceive is already solved? Or, the problem is with the individuals who are "censoring harshly". Perhaps you should address them?

Not that I'm retracting my proposal for shifts in documentation. Just suggesting possible perceptual contributors.