Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Perl: the Markov chain saw
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Should a Socratic Dialogue be attempted?

by Aim9b (Monk)
on Oct 25, 2007 at 14:06 UTC ( #647178=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Should a Socratic Dialogue be attempted?

Speaking as a real noobie, I prefer the answer, the why it works, AND the pointer to the doc/posts/articles/etc. I'll most always try several pieces of code first, & will include it in the question if relevant, but if I'm given ONLY the RTFM answer, I'll find another place to ask.
At this site, that's never been the case. I usually get several of each, & I appreciate it more than you know. At most times, I too learn by reading other posts. It's a fantastic tool, & I'd hate to see it fade away.

Usually, I'm reading 4-5 good answers by the time I even get to trying to answer the question. I use these to 'test' the validity of my own answer. Sometimes, I'm right on, other times, well... but if by some minor miracle, I get to a point where I can answer some other persons post, I'll consider it an honor to be among the knowledgeable people here at the monestary.

So, my vote (?) would be - Do BOTH, & let the recipient decide.

1. You get the issue resolved & possibly gain a long term perl advocate.
2. The ones that don't stay, wouldn't anyway.
3. You probably helped me & folks like me, without even realizing it.

RE: the CB, It scrolls off too fast, & I'd feel I was missing a lot if usable information.


Comment on Re: Should a Socratic Dialogue be attempted?

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://647178]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others romping around the Monastery: (7)
As of 2014-07-12 12:11 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    When choosing user names for websites, I prefer to use:








    Results (239 votes), past polls