I found myself on this page just now, and, as one does, went to upvote one of the nodes. Except -- there was no Vote button.

I checked that I was still logged in (there are monks who shall remain nameless that mention they get logged out ALL tHE TIME), but that wasn't the problem.

Thoughts?

Updated 2019-0815 @ 1052ET Thanks, the vote button has reappeared. Thanks everyone!

7 the

New Newest Nodes default for Show nodes created within the past

7

days ... Newest Nodes Settings

A fellow monk singlehandedly invented the reap category "troll-feeding", and keeps applying it as consideration.

It's normally declined, but I'm wondering why so many people still consider this reap worthy.

Or do people nowadays just always click reap when they see a consideration?

I'm bringing this up, because this amounts to a silent change in policy which should be discussed.

FWIW: I wrote this comment before the parent was considered, and it was not apparent for me that it's really worth reaping.

But still, if we start inventing such categories it'll border at censorship, at least.

Do you remember what happened today, 10 years ago?

No, not my first posting, that was a little bit earlier, still as Anonymous Monk. (Probably this one.)

Also not my first posting as afoken, also a little bit earlier.

So, what happened?

What happened? happened.

Some script-kiddie has demonstrated that storing passwords in plain text was (and still is) a pretty stupid idea. Caught perlmonks with pants down.

Promises were made:

Closing the Hole

PerlMonks admins are working with the Pair.com folks (who manage our hardware and connectivity resources) to evaluate and strengthen security on the servers. No information is available at this time as to the status of this effort.

Strengthening Authentication

The administrators are planning to implement hashed passwords (allowing more than 8 chars).

Now guess the current state. Or, just test it: Enter your user name into What's my password?. Click the submit button. Open your mail box.

This is what I received:

From: vroom@perlmonks.org
Subject: Password Mail
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2019 12:46:51 -0400
X-Mailer: Perl script "index.pl"
        using Mail::Sender 0.8.10 by Jenda Krynicky, Czechlands
        running on perlmonks.com (216.92.34.251)
        under account "root"
Message-ID: <20190729_164651_081604.vroom@perlmonks.org>

Hey there.
You or someone else has requested a password for your username or e-mail
address.
Before you freak out, take a few deep breaths and remember that it's YOU
and not THEM who is getting this password.

Here's your info:

username: afoken
passwd: *** DELETED FROM THE MAIL BODY ***
human name: Alexander Foken

love, the management
http://perlmonks.org/

CONGRATULATIONS!

Perlmonks' pants are still down, ten years later.

See also:

• Status of Recent User Information Leak
• It's Time for Everyone to Change Passwords!
• Anger Management
• Tidings (nothing to see here)
• Tidings through 2014-11-10 (longer plain text passwords)

Alexander

I've read the Writeup Formatting Tips linked to from the editing window, and the FAQ, but neither mention it. Please update that documentation as well.

Thank you.

Edited to add:
For example, LanX and choroba quoted each other and me at https://www.perlmonks.com/?node_id=11103184

See Reaped: Re^5: Solving possible missing links

I hope this is just a strange race condition from while reaping...

This node was up for moderation recently, and the cause was bitrot (out of date links).

Would it be useful to go through the node database, and do a check for external links to see if they can be updated in the same way?

The story of paco, as many experienced monks know, has long been an enigma in the Monastery, a source of ongoing curiosity and speculation (click through for more).

Today, the speculation grew curiouser, as newly-discovered evidence seemed deepen the mystery:

1. Begin by visiting the venerable's home node and noting the date of last visit.

2. Next, note the post date of this node and then note its Approval nodelet values.

Miracle? Impersonation? Gallifreyan shenanigans? Something else entirely?

Who knows? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

So...it remains a right mystery suitable for a lazy Friday hobnob over cherry pies.

--f

Update: Update links to nodes to help play the legend forward.

Hello my fellow monks, I am new to this forum. I have been using perl now for a few years. I stopped using the language about 5 year ago. I have my regrets for doing that. Now i am learning everything from scratch. Well i hope it will be fun doing that with the companionship of other monks.

I wish to learn and contribute to this community and if possible to Perl itself. I am high impressed with the level of documentation found here. I know i have some more reading to do and i hope i can commit myself to study and learn.

Once again i humbly greet you all and wish to learn from you all.

I've created a ChatterBox client pm-cb-g that uses the New Chatterbox XML Ticker. When posting, sometimes the message is not displayed, but when I try to submit it again, I get back the dreaded Whoa, Cowboy! You said that already. Don't 'reload'? So somehow, PerlMonks thinks the message has been sent by me, but it doesn't display it.

It's never happened when posting from a browser.

I have a suspicion it's related to the fact one of our servers has a wrong timezone setting. When the message gets processed by it, the wrong timestamp makes it too old (or too far in the future) to be displayed. I tried to study the relevant nodes (chatrepeated and repeatedchatter), but my pmdev-fu is to weak. Can anyone help? Would it be possible to fix the timezone on the server so I can at least disprove the suspicion?

I usually append #2, #3 etc. to the message when reposting it to prevent the Whoa cowboy effect. My personal record is #7, the last message was posted via the browser as I lost patients.

We have a new feature: usergroup-private discussion threads.

This lets members of groups (such as pmdev) have threaded discussions, just like in the regular sections, but completely unvisible to anyone not in that user group (aside from gods, of course).

Up until now, user groups have always used wiki nodes for intra-group discussion; but wikis are pretty suboptimal for this purpose. (They remain useful for other purposes, such as collaboratively maintained documentation.) The esteemed chromatic made such as observation way back when the concept of the wiki nodetype was first proposed:

IMHO wikis are best suited to accumulating community resources and keeping them relevant. I do not think that for general discussion that a wiki makes more sense than the usual noding. But if a topic comes up often, summarizing it in a wiki would make sense.

So this new feature is intended to replace the use of wikis for discussion.

If you're a member of a user group, try going to the group's page (janitors, pmdev, breathers of fire, etc.) and see what's at the bottom.

One main way in which these threaded discussions are different from the regular sections is that nodes are not votable and will always have reputation zero — the idea being that it wouldn't be fair for a monk to be able benefit monetarily from posts which are not accessible to the general public.

Consequent to that, replies are always shown newest first.

Whenever someone posts a direct reply to a group — which is essentially a top-level post under a group — it sends a message to all members of the group, something like this:

There is a new comment on pmdev by jdporter...

This idea was initially floated and developed in Create new [pmdev]-only section "Pmdev Discussion" and Create new [gods]-only section "Gods Forum". But note that the final implementation of the feature did not adhere to the designs suggested in those threads.

If you're in pmdev, you can see a technical description of the implementation by visiting the new nodetype usergroupnote; scroll to the bottom to the documentation.

I noticed a limitation in the [doc://...] parser for Perl documentation

According to What shortcuts can I use for linking to other information?

Link directly to a the doc of a function or variable: [doc://name] e.g. [doc://-X|file test ops]

Link directly to a specific document by name: [doc://name] e.g. [doc://perlipc]

Link to a section internal to a doc: [doc://name#anchor] e.g. [doc://perlfaq2#Perl-Books]

but while

• [doc://split] -> split

• [doc://split#split] -> split

Looks like the automatic detection to add functions/ into the URL is failing because the #anchor part is taken into the check, and there is no "split#split" in the lookup hash.

I tried to find the responsible code to be able to fix it but couldn't identify it yet.

You have been restricted from replying to that node.
[download]

This works in the JS code works inside the console in FF and Chrome and will show hidden html-anchors ready to be cut&paste with PM markup

javascript:(function(){
    var path = location.pathname.replace(/^\//,"").replace(/\.html$/,"
+");
    var as =document.getElementsByTagName("a");
    for (i in as) { 
        var l = as[i]; 
        if (l.id && l.classList.length == 0 ){
            var dlink   = path + "#" + l.id;
            l.innerHTML = "<b>" + path + "#[doc://"+dlink+"]</b><br>";
+ 
            l.href      = "#" + l.id 
        } 
    }
})()
[download]

The bold parts are generated by JS

perlintro#[doc://perlintro#Perl-variable-types]

Perl variable types

Perl has three main variable types: scalars, arrays, and hashes.

perlintro#[doc://perlintro#Scalars]

Scalars

A scalar represents a single value:

you can C&P the links then into a PM post, and they'll render as:

• perlintro#Perl variable types
• perlintro#Scalars

I still have problems putting it into a bookmark getting strange JS errors about keyword "var".

NB: This is far from being bug-free perldoc.perl.org and PM markup have their own idiosyncrasies! But it's a start.

Feel free to post better versions!!!

In a recent post, I wanted to reference the perl documentation for the open function. The following code links to the right page, but does not go the section on 'open'.

open

Am I overlooking some detail in the FAQ. (I am not even going to try to create a link to this today)

I believe that this example is typical of several links that I have posted. The same solution will probably apply to all of them, but lets concentrate on this one for now.