Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
No such thing as a small change
 
PerlMonks  

Re: I think Casey West is right

by petdance (Parson)
on Jun 14, 2001 at 20:17 UTC ( #88478=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to I think Casey West is right

I marked the node because the poster clearly didn't bother spending any amount of time thinking about what he wanted.

I went and posted a new version, both because I'm actually interested in the topic personally, and as an example.

I'm all for helping, but I've gotta see some indication that I'm not being asked to do someone's job for them.

xoxo,
Andy

%_=split/;/,".;;n;u;e;ot;t;her;c; ".   #   Andy Lester
'Perl ;@; a;a;j;m;er;y;t;p;n;d;s;o;'.  #   http://petdance.com
"hack";print map delete$_{$_},split//,q<   andy@petdance.com   >


Comment on Re: I think Casey West is right
Re: Re: I think Casey West is right
by virtualsue (Vicar) on Jun 15, 2001 at 00:36 UTC
    I saw that you did that, and thought it was bizarre. Why didn't you just expand on the topic in a followup node if you were genuinely interested about the subject? That way, the original poster could have learned something. Instead, you went for the brass knuckles. I think the current system is seriously flawed if relatively harmless nodes such as the one under discussion are removed. Unfortunately, this is far from the first time I've seen it happen. I'd prefer to see the power to initiate this type of action made more difficult to use, or restricted to a smaller group of more experienced & tolerant people.
      In retrospect, I agree that I should have added on to it. So we live and learn.

      I'm not sure that "tolerance", in the sense of "tolerance for people who don't do any of their own legwork", is going to help the quality of the nodebase.

      And while we're talking about "tolerance", what's with people --ing my comments that they happen to disagree with? I ++ed tilly's original post in this thread, even though I didn't agree with it much, and was all but attacked in it, because it was well thought out and well-written. To my mind, ++/-- is all about quality, not battles of personalities.

      xoxo,
      Andy

      %_=split/;/,".;;n;u;e;ot;t;her;c; ".   #   Andy Lester
      'Perl ;@; a;a;j;m;er;y;t;p;n;d;s;o;'.  #   http://petdance.com
      "hack";print map delete$_{$_},split//,q<   andy@petdance.com   >
      
        And while we're talking about "tolerance", what's with people --ing my comments that they happen to disagree with? I ++ed tilly's original post in this thread, even though I didn't agree with it much, and was all but attacked in it, because it was well thought out and well-written. To my mind, ++/-- is all about quality, not battles of personalities.

        I didn't -- anyone's post in this thread, but I did ++ some posts I agreed with (yours not included). I wouldn't -- a post unless it was seriously, radically bad in some way, like being factually or technically inaccurate.

        That being said, I don't think it's wrong to -- a post with which one strongly disagrees, if the disagreement is serious enough, and on a truly serious matter.

        In this case, there's a broader, more general question of advocacy that I keep seeing get debated here and elsewhere. It's a serious matter, and I think one side is actually wrong. I'm not much of a -- person (see above), but it's the sort of thing that, were I a -- person, I might well use some votes downvoting. But I wouldn't be doing it on a basis of personality, but on the quality of the ideas expressed.

        It's easy, in this sort of debate, to confuse personality with idea. How one advocates (and similarly, how one interacts with others, how one teaches, and so on) is partly a matter of personality. But it's a matter of choice, as well, and of idea. I also think (even though this is an unfashionable idea these days) that one has some control over this aspect of ones behavior, that our personality isn't just a given, unchangeable fact.

        adamsj

        They laughed at Joan of Arc, but she went right ahead and built it. --Gracie Allen

Re: Re: I think Casey West is right
by shotgunefx (Parson) on Jun 15, 2001 at 01:24 UTC
    As far as doing someone else's job, we couldn't be more in agreement. I like helping people. I remember years ago when I was trying to write game software and I stumbled upon a BBS that John Carmack and Michael Abrash of DOOM/Quake fame frequented. John actually shared and posted his beta source code for the then in development game "DOOM". It was like Christmas. I think of Perlmonks in the same way only now I feel I am (hopefully) contributing something useful back.

    That said, I HATE when someone doesn't make any effort at all and posts something like "I need a script that emails me a form and a database..". At least make an effort, but as far as the website testing software node, I didn't see it as doing someone's homework. While vaguq, it sounded to me like someone wanting to get information about an interesting topic (to me anyway) that is not something you can't easily find in a book or other resource.. While not truly a Perl question, it's certainly relavant to many monks here. Perl is the "Duct tape" of the Internet after all. Frankly, I was really suprised it was reaped.

    -Lee

    "To be civilized is to deny one's nature."

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://88478]
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 2014-12-27 04:40 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    Is guessing a good strategy for surviving in the IT business?





    Results (176 votes), past polls