Why did people vote for this?

[tilly]

This is a full response to Monastery To Do (or) To Add List, my initial gut response. I thought about posting this several times, probably shouldn't but I am going to set rant mode = 1 anyways because I am really bothered by it. Yes, this is a flame (though not nearly as bad as it could be). If that bothers you, you know where to spend a --.

What kind of inappreciative, insensitive jerk does it take to come up with a post like this and call it "discussion"? Why didn't people read with a little more consideration of the overall situation and either not vote or vote -- instead of voting for it? Now the fact that one person (bladx in this case) would write something like that doesn't bother me. In a large group of people you expect to have someone around like that. The fact that the post got to +50 (which will encourage him to write more insensitive garbage) does bother me.

Now the thesis of his post is that there should be a public todo list of items that are being worked on for PerlMonks. This should be there as a visible audit of vroom et al. It isn't that the proposal is so bad. It is a little thoughtless when you consider that the site is losing money, vroom has been laid off from the company which developed it, and our beloved site is now a charity case with volunteer time from vroom, and very uncertain funding. But it is the details of his 3 arguments for, and 3 against which really bothered me. Please follow both the original and my summary of them.

Arguments For

1. We need to make it easier for people to know what is already suggested so they can think up more work! Ummm..no. We don't. There is no shortage of necessary work that needs to be done to run this place. We don't need to add a stream of creative demands on non-existent resources.
2. We need to audit vroom to see that he is doing what he is supposed to! Remember, the site is great because we are here, and so they owe us! WTF? Tim Vroom, the primary developer of PerlMonks, has been laid off. Do you understand? The world does not owe you. Is this a mystery? The fact that we have a site is because the company that got burned developing it has turned it over as a charity case to a foundation with lots of ideas but a distinct lack of funds. The fact that it is still being run is due to vroom volunteering to do so even though he has a life and a job that have nothing to do with PerlMonks. He is not commissioned by you to do anything here. That is a gift. And when you give people who are giving you a gift with lectures on how much they owe you and not vice versa, they tend to get upset and stop giving you gifts. Don't get me wrong. I enjoy the site. I think it is great. I get value. That makes me a customer, not an owner. I am not owed for that. Why can't you understand that?
3. We need to be able to vote on a priority list to set vroom's marching orders. Excuse me? Have we hired vroom? Are we paying his bills? Not the last that I looked!

Arguments Against

1. People could use Super Search to see if people have suggested what they are going to suggest. Again you presume that people should be generating a constant stream of suggestions for ways to add to the value of this site. Funny, I happen to think that the site works fairly well. There also aren't a lot of resources to satisfy these demands. If you really have a feature that you want to add to the site, then do as jcwren did. Build it somewhere else and let everyone know that it exists. In fact jcwren has another gift to offer - he has hosting services and hardware available. If you want something, go build it! Don't bitch and complain.
2. Would there be enough things to put on the list? Again note the presumption that our priority is getting a lot of marching order to vroom. This is completely ass backwards. As was pointed out, the true value in this site is in its content. My top concern is whether the site will be here by this time next year. Don't be complacent, the site could fold quite easily. Of course minor details like paying your way are easily forgotten by 17 year old kids who may never have had a real job. But the people who are running this site don't have that luxury. If they don't have money, they may have to shut down. (Have you donated?)
3. Perhaps the people running the site just want to be lazy. Were I vroom my response to this would basically be, f*ck you. Take a bloody look at this site. Building something like this takes a lot of work. It wasn't laziness that got this built and going. And then after putting in all of this work, vroom got laid off. But he cares about the project so he puts in even more time, on a voluntary basis, just to keep it going. And you have the gall to accuse him of not working hard enough? For this little gem and this little gem alone, my -- vote was guaranteed.

Now it is no secret, last night I had an enjoyable dinner with several PerlMonks, vroom included. We barely raised the subject of this post. He apparently saw it, got annoyed at the tone and didn't finish reading it.

That makes him a better man than me. Had I been in vroom's shoes, I would have read it and flamed immediately. As things stand I still read it, let it stew for a day, then ranted anyways. And why am I ranting? Because this lazy and arrogant, "The world owes me the treats I want!" attitude is something I have disliked for as long as I can remember. And I don't want to see the Discussions section of the Monastery filled up with that attitude.

My final question is this. Why did people vote it up? If you voted for it, please explain. Are you unaware that the Monastery is in trouble? Did you read the accusations of laziness etc and agree? Did you just see that it was long and fairly coherent, then vote ++ for the typing effort? Did it not occur to you that, given that the suggestion is unlikely to go anywhere, the only real value of the post might be XP Whoring? WTF were you thinking???

Because bladx is not the problem. The problem is that the feedback that he has apparently gotten for this is mainly positive, which won't exactly toilet train him into not dumping more crap like this. In fact if he has the instincts of your basic XP whore, he will be encouraged to continue in this vein! And likewise other people who read it, and see the response, will be encouraged to try their hands at it. And that we don't need.

[tye]

Well, I didn't vote it up. But I didn't mind the post at all because I didn't read the last sentence of each argument for/against, which is where the apparent bad attitude shows up. Reread the post but stop reading as soon as you feel you get the general gist of each of the numbered items. I think you'll manage to completely miss the attitude problem if you do that.

I don't know how much of the upvotes can be explained that way, but I was so surprised when I found those bits via your node that I thought the insight might be useful.

        - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")

[mpolo]

I missed the negativity in the tone when reading it as well. I personally didn't see the idea itself as too negative -- a list of stuff in the works. No promises, just "I think this is a good idea. Maybe some day." or "Never gonna happen."

While I have seen lots more prominence given to the Offering Plate recently, I wasn't aware of the gravity of the current situation, and I thank you for bringing it to my attention. Personally, I can't do much about it as I have literally $0 to my name. (And 0 €, for that matter.) Other than encourage others to support the site, which seems almost hypocritical when I can't.

Would there be a non-tacky way to put up a list of donors/"responsable members of the community", as a sort of incentive to have people support the site? I'm not talking about anything drastic involving the experience system, like $50/year => max level 5, $100/year => max level 6... Just a list of the monks who've donated, perhaps separated into levels of giving. Like the stuff the college alumni association always sends you, with the lists of all the people who want to show off how well-off they are or how much they love their alma mater. Maybe this would be too crass and materialistic for the monastery, though.

P.S. Click here to prove you're a real PerlMonk.

[tilly]

You are right. I habitually just read things straight through so I hadn't noticed how different the impression is when you skim instead.

That is a verbal trick I had not been aware of, and one I will pay attention to in the future so I can recognize when someone is doing it.

[arhuman]

I've never seen tilly so upset...

First : I upvoted bladx post.
Then to answer your question I did it beccause :

• I didn't perceive a SO negative tone.
• I perceived it as an attempt to contribute and enhance the site
• Some Ideas weren't so stupid (It would perhaps prevent a discussion requesting for 'null' votes every month)

That's being said, I was a little bit bothered by some mis-perceiption about Vroom's HARD work.
BUT, I took the positive aspects (I prefer this kind of post than the bladx's first post...) and thought they outweight the negative ones.

I didn't know for Vroom's laid off, and I'm really sorry for it.
I didn't talk to Vroom so I may have missed how much this post made him upset.

May be I'm to kind or too stupid (May be both) but I still can't be angry after bladx.
He was probably clumsy, but I feel that he didn't do it with a negative intent
(and his post on this thread tend to proove I'm right on this).
IMHO, a simple and calm explanation of the facts and a call to people (constructive) help/contribution would be better than a flame.

Final words : I'm not sure I was right to ++ him.
I'm sure that -- wasn't the right answer.
I still believe that bladx's intent was to contribute...

"Only Bad Coders Code Badly In Perl" (OBC2BIP)

[jlongino]

I am rather disappointed in both writeups. Both have several things in common:
• Both are entitled to their own opinions.
• Both are overzealous.
• Both are somewhat mean spirited and insensitive to vroom.
• Both make unfair assumptions about what goes on behind the scenes. One about how much they think they know, the other about how much they think everyone else knows.
• Both make good points that are overshadowed by their negativity.
• Both should have used more private means to express the negative aspects of their posts.
In retrospect, I'm still trying to figure out why I ++ either one.

[bladx]

As a respectful ( I hope, ) Monk here at the Monastery, I wish to say that I am sorry for the article/petition I posted. I thought long and hard about it, and wanted to give some of my ideas/opinions, alas, I gave too much information (of my own,) and it all didn't need to be posted. If there is a next time, I surely will try my best not to create a rift such as this has created, I by no means, wanted to start a mini-flame war, and hope it stops here.

I simply ask for your forgiveness for the trouble I have caused with my latest node, and hope that you all will forgive me, especially you, tilly.

Yes, I have grown up a lot in the maturity level of what I post, since I first came here, as you can see if you feel like it in my older nodes (which most are really really really stupid...) and lately have taken a lot more time to consider what I am writing.

I really think that jlongino had a good summary of the two articles, and brings the best argument to the forefront, which was "Both should have used more private means to express the negative aspects of their posts." I think that if there is a next time, that this should happen instead of me creating a problem or rift like this.

This problem should have never happened, but it is mostly my fault for planting the seed for this trouble to start, and I am sorry that I ever did it. I just didn't think that it would cause such a ripple. I will think twice in the future.

I also would like to apologize publicly to vroom since I made some rude comments and presuppositions about what he actually does. I don't really need to make comments like that, and am very grateful that you have spent your time working and creating Perl Monks... thanks!

Please forgive me, and thanks for listening to my opinion (although it might be a bit raw sometimes...).

Andy Summers

[tilly]

(update Apologies for any confusion, but in this entire post, the first paragraph included, I am talking directly to bladx. "You" is always bladx.)

I would first like to respond to jlongino's point. I didn't make my post private, and I don't think it should have been private. It didn't really help that your response to my private feedback (which I always give) on my -- was "So what?" But the real reason why it was public, why it had to be public, is that it was mostly addressed at people who voted for your post. Being that I don't know who voted for your post, there is no way I can respond to them without making it public. Therefore my main points had to either not be made, or had to be made publically.

Now for the personal points.

Yes, you have become more mature in your posts. Your writing style has improved. You have become more effective at getting your points across. I hope you will next learn not to be so free with underhanded insults and assaults. (Perhaps you just learned that.)

As for forgiveness, I won't give it, and you hopefully don't need it. This is not personal. I simply do not agree with the word "sorry". I have seen too many people who will do mean things, say, "sorry" - and then having been forgiven will go ahead and do the same mean things again. After all, why not when forgiveness is so easily come by, what value does "personal responsibility" have?

I am not a Christian. I don't believe that repenting magically makes things OK. The action remains bad no matter how sincerely you do or do not regret it. It does not matter what a great person you are, or how many other good works you do, that action remains bad.

However I also try to avoid grudges. I try to seperate the person from the event. If your behaviour from now on indicates improvement, you will never hear from me about this again. I won't forgive you, but I also won't hold it against you. Because while I don't believe in repentance, I do believe in learning. If you study animal behaviour and game theory (which I have), you will learn that the past is irrelevant except as a predictor of the future. (Classic fallacy, people tend to believe that the amount they have invested in a particular course of action, project, etc matters in deciding whether to stay the course. It doesn't. For now you can see a decent popular article on it in the Google cache.)

I believe that. The past is past. If your future actions indicate that you have changed, I will react accordingly. And I encourage others to do likewise.

UPDATE
As jlongino pointed out in a reply that some may miss, he was not saying that the post shouldn't have been made publically, but certain aspects of it shouldn't have been done in public.

My opinion is that it is unfortunate that I felt motivated to write a post like that, but the tone of the post is part and parcel of the strength of the message that I was trying to get across. Furthermore it was not something I choose to do lightly, as should be apparent if you read through my posting history.

[lemming]

I didn't vote up the original post because bladx didn't seem to have a firm idea of how the site was run and what vroom's role really was. However, I did the same thing that tye did and scanned for gist rather than details. After rereading it, I do think the tone is demanding and with bladex's rather new status, rather presumptuous.

I think the idea wasn't that bad, but needed a dose of reality. I think a better way to help vroom maintain and improve the site is needed, but I think vroom is the best equiped to figure out how others can help. As the site grows, it's a lot for one person to handle.

As for the $$$ needed. It's on my list for when I've got an actual income.

[da]

I also didn't upvote the post for the same reasons.

I did add an idea to the thread regarding symbolic ways that people with ideas and itchy fingers could help. It would also be useful to hear back from long-standing community members about how perlmonks has dealt with 'community relations' in the past. I have not gotten a sense, in my brief time here, how vroom feels about the random suggestions and appeals from the masses but I imagine he's become a bit hardened to the "we must do this" tone of a lot of them.

___
-DA
> perl -MPOSIX -e'$ENV{TZ}="US/Eastern";print ctime(1000000000)'
Sat Sep  8 21:46:40 2001

[scain]

Bad, scain, Bad!

I must admit I did ++ his node, though I did regret it afterwards. When I initially read his post, I didn't do it carefully, and besides, I am a fairly optomistic person and don't like to see the ugliness that the post implies (albeit, rather strongly). My first quick thought was "hmm, a list of things that might make PM better--that's not a bad thing." and there went the ++. Also, I tend to ++ discussions in general since I think getting ideas out there is a generally a good thing.

Well, there it is.
Scott

[Chrisf]

I bet at least 25 of those ++'s came from people who didn't even read the node and were just going through it trying to get their own voting bonus. Removing the voting bonus would reduce these situations.

Most people here do seem to take their experience points just a little bit too seriously though. Sure, if you get a bunch of them you can put up a nice pretty picture, maybe get a few more votes to spend on --'ing certain people because their perl skills exceed your own, and you might even get to move some nodes around. As far as I know, no matter what your experience you can still post questions here and reply to other's questions, that's good enough for me.

[shotgunefx]

It does have the tone of an arrogant little sh*t. It demanding and insulting. I think the rep can be attributed to people glancing over it.

While most Monks contribute to the community, the use and participation is a privilege, not a right. If you care so much, pony up a couple of bucks. While some may not be able to afford it, I bet the majority here could make a small donation.

While I would like to see a few features, I'm not going to bitch about it because I don't have the right. I've gotten so much from this place. How can I complain? I appreciate what I'm getting from the Monastary now.

This site is the most useful thing I have found on the Net. Thanks vroom!

-Lee

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

[jynx]

d'oh,

i realized that the demanding tone was inappropriate, but by the time i voted, many had already posted "tone it down" style replies (including you) so i didn't really think through what i was voting on, and ++'d it. Thank you for making me re-evaluate my thoughts.

i wouldn't downvote it anyway, but if i had a choice i wouldn't vote at all. Hindsight 20/20? No, nothing's ever clear.

sorry,
jynx



NOTE: Please do not vote for this node, it would only be a /msg but i thought some social acceptance of error was in order.

[princepawn]

I dont have a lot of time to put into this topic, but I do have a few ethings to say.
1. I am a big fan of shareware. That is, try it and if you like it, then buy it. I do this for all software I work with -- games, spreadsheets, etc. I think Perlmonks is the best way for me to get help about Perl and thus am willing to pay money. But note well, when I pay money I have expectations about what I get. In some cases, it's a warranty, In other cases, a support contract, in other cases, I have "stock" in the company. vroom has made it clear that this is his site, meaning he sees it as something that he maintains final word on at alltimes. Thus with that privilege, comes the responsibility of keeping it going, all by himself if need be. I would be happy to pay for disk space, bandwidth, or whatever. But it is reasonable and common to expect something in return.
2. sorry to hear about vroom being laid off. I guess he finished school in Michigan didn't he?

3. We need to be able to vote on a priority list to set vroom's marching orders. Excuse me? Have we hired vroom? Are we paying his bills? Not the last that I looked!

Again, the issue of paying for control of a person is coming up. mirod's retort contained this same sentiment. Other CPAN authors, ERYQ, jean-louis leroy and others seem to think that their role in the freeware community is limited because no-one is paying them.

But many others work tirelessly for free and don't get into hot and testy battles with those expecting service from them.

so, we can see Perlmonks as a big contribution to the perl community just like DBI or CGI or Perl itself. And with that comes (usually) free support channels, good documentaiton and some degree of democracy and some means of submitting suggestions and patches to the system.

This isn't all my thoughts on this issue but I do wish vroom were a bit more vocal about that status of perlmonks and whether it stands a chance of collapsing. And just how much control of the site he would give up so that others can help keep it going. Ie, someone buy a DSL line, someone but disk space, etc.

[mirod]

This is quite interesting princepawn, and it explains some of your previous posts.

The basic problem is that you think in terms of shareware/freeware, while I, as most (all?) of the authors on CPAN belong to the Open Source community. When you grab a module from CPAN you don't get the right to annoy the author or to ask them for support. You get the source. You can use the software if you like it, or read it for educational purposes or modify it if you find a bug or improve it or do whatever you want with it. But it comes with zero rights to support.

Now granted most of the author, including me and I'd be willing to bet ERYQ and Jean-Louis Leroy, do support their modules. If you ask nicely and dont act nasty we are more than happy to help you or anybody else, answer questions, add features, apply patches... But we do all that out of pure good will, because we enjoy it. So the minute you start acting like a jerk and start demanding things and complaining about the lack of support, the whole thing is not that fun anymore, and we might well tell you to go back to buying shareware and not being able to patch the darn thing when it doesn't work properly.

As for PerlMonks and Vroom being in control... Vroom has done a terrific job at creating this community and at maintaining the site and adding features. It works fairly well and suggested improvements are quite minor. So I think he's shown that he can be trusted, we all enjoy the site, why on Earth would we want to make his life less enjoyable? Let him go on running the site and let's try to provide him with the means to keep on doing it. I am quite sure he does a better job than I would do, so why would I want a piece of power here besides posting rights?

[Tuna]

But note well, when I pay money I have expectations about what I get. In some cases, it's a warranty, In other cases, a support contract, in other cases, I have "stock" in the company. vroom has made it clear that this is his site, meaning he sees it as something that he maintains final word on at alltimes. Thus with that privilege, comes the responsibility of keeping it going, all by himself if need be. I would be happy to pay for disk space, bandwidth, or whatever. But it is reasonable and common to expect something in return.

Ok, wait a minute. What exactly do you mean by reasonable and common to expect something in return? How about vroom sends you a big fscking bill for the knowledge and resources you have obtained here? Now granted, you have also been a contributor here, but the concept of "giving back what was so freely given to me" does extend beyond sharing your knowledge and expertise with others. Hey, if you don't/can't contribute $$$ to the site, great. But please don't propagate the idea that one should receive something more tangible (for lack of a better term) for their contribution here.

As for my harsh tone, it is derived from the many hours and resources I have devoted to helping battered women and their children, so naturally, donations with any expectation attached to it is a sore spot with me.

[pmas]

I read your rant, tilly, and then anxiously checked if I voted original bladx node up. Thank god I did not.

I recall I read original bladx node, and I got feeling that bladx is not in position to give advice - I recall only his rather stupid proposal to put whole monastery on CD, and "Node Wars" - another stupid idea. So my gut feeling was right that this one is another stupid one - although it was not as obvious as previous ones. I abstained from voting - then.

I checked bladx nodes now - he is really into stupid proposals, like adding "chants". And it looks like bladx is not going to be easy pot-trained. S/he is a repeat offender. We can hope for a pause after this one.... :-)

I did noticed XP whoring, I still missed what you noticed about "people running the site just want to be lazy". So I voted ++ for kudra's proposition to add list of features "under construction" into Q and A section, via simple editing "powered by editors" - no coding needed; and for tilly's and tye's proposition to make development a little bit more "open" and help vroom to add new needed features.

I am strong believer to make all things via most simple means and existing tools, and most of features from original post will be possible to add by manual moving nodes around.

It will be also help for new users to have all discussions about new requested features in one place, so they do not feel urgent need to re-submit them again. I know I was in need of it when I started... ;-)

pmas
To make errors is human. But to make million errors per second, you need a computer.

[agent00013]

bladx's posts may have been foolish, but ripping on him in public is not appropriate, either. Many people have already posted about him needing to think through his nodes before posting and to ascertain his thoughts before deeming them post-worthy. Yes, they may be silly ideas. Some people seemed to like a few of those posts though. I recall his "Node Wars" post making The Monastery Gates.

-new users to have all discussions about new requested features in one place
This in itself sounds like a requested feature. The new users won't learn that their posts are in need of improvement if the general Monk public doesn't see them and give them a helpful critique.


---

Love is random; fear is inevitable. -- Orson Scott Card
PerlMonks is good for Perl, but JavaJunkies is good for Java

[Anonymous Monk]

Some people seemed to like a few of those posts though. I recall his "Node Wars" post making The Monastery Gates.

He is a friar and able to move his own nodes to the frontpage!

[tilly]

Now let's not all pile onto bladx.

He went way out of line. I got upset and flamed him. I don't think we need the world + dog jumping up and saying, "Me too!"

As for the insult you missed. It is hidden in this sentence about why the people who run the site might not want to implement his proposal:

Perhaps this type of information should not be shown to the general public, lest their secrets of ?hard work? sound more like the qualities of a Perl programmer.

The virtues of a Perl programmer, as documented at the very end of perl, are Laziness, Impatience, and Hubris. In other words the accusation is that the people running this site are afraid that if we knew what they really did we would realize that they don't do much (Laziness), are unwilling to take the time to address our concerns (Impatience), and are rather arrogant about it all (Hubris).