Re: Re: Re**2: Help with the concept of closures.

[sauoq]

This node falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.

[merlyn]

No, he should make an attempt to answer the question that was posed rather than point at a generic answer that resides on another site.

Not everyone is aware of the body of my work on my site. Over 160 articles, many of which address the questions that come up here.

Had the original poster said "I read merlyn's article on...", I'd never have referred them back to there. But I bet there's info in that article that applies, and more. Hence, it's a useful contribution, with a very large reward-to-effort ratio.

Yes, I could spend more time constructing a custom answer. But I didn't, this time. I do, sometimes. I try to make a positive contribution. Are you saying I'm making a negative contribution? Maybe it's not as positive as you want. Fine. Keep wanting that. But I may or may not satisfy you. I can only hope I'm helping to satisfy the original poster, and I'll let them speak for themselves.

Also please stop accusing me of taking action because I'm smug. F.U., if you think that. Stop putting me on a pedestal. That's your problem, not mine. Get over your trip with apparent authority. I'm just a guy. I write a lot, but everything I write has to stand on its own, not on some sort of historical reputation that you think I have. I don't ask for any kind of respect but what the next guy already gets from you. If you're not willing to give me that, then it's your apparent problem with the "me" that's in your head, not the actual me.

-- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker
Be sure to read my standard disclaimer if this is a reply.

[adrianh]

No, he should make an attempt to answer the question that was posed rather than point at a generic answer that resides on another site.

I disagree (and I also --'d your node since it contained a few too many insults for my tastes).

It's not always choice between "short reference" and "full explanation". It could be a choice between "short reference" and "nothing at all".

I saw the node when it was posted, I could answer it (in detail) if I had wanted to. However, it was late, I'd had a rough day and I couldn't be bothered.

merlyn could be bothered. I cannot see this as a bad thing.

I certainly don't see it as "condescendive" (hattmoward) or "smug or self serving" (sauoq). I think those attitudes are in the readers head, not in the text. Nobody, as far as I can see, is offering up merlyn as a role model or placing him on a pedestal. All he did was provide a reference to an article on closures.

I've formed my own opinion of merlyn from his posts (not saying whether it's good or bad ;-). However, I'm always careful to read what was written.

I would prefer to have a pointers to additional material as well as detailed answers. I don't see how adding information can be seen as a bad thing.

---

Update: attributed quotes :-)

[Limbic~Region]

adrianh,
I personally have been on the fence on this one. See, I think merlyn's answer was enough - for me. I am not so sure that it was enough for DigitalKitty. he goes on to say later that if she had said she had read the column and was still having problems.... Well, maybe she did - it was a poorly written question if she failed to mention all the background. Was it any better for him to assume she would be able to answer her own question if she had? I guess the only thing I would have done would be:
I have a column that. Reply here if you still have questions after reading it.

In my admittedly twisted mind, this says a few things without actually saying them. It says there is the smallest possibility that merlyn left something out of the article or that it was too ambigous. It says that even if it was 100% complete and clear that it might be above DigitalKitty's comprehension and he could break it down further if need be. It is still short and sweet.

Am I trying to say merlyn's contribution to the community are no good because he doesn't placate everyone? Hell no. He is who he is. A lot of people don't like him for that. Are there others better at "delivery"? Hell yes. In the big scheme of things, does it really matter? Not really. If overall, the community is generally better off for the contribution, it isn't worth the time or energy to bitch about it (not that you were) either way.

Ok, I feel better. Cheers - L~R

[BUU]

>>No, he should make an attempt to answer the question that was posed rather than point at a generic answer that resides on another site.

Why?

>>Many of us put in the effort to answer the same questions over and over again.

many not all. I fail to see why on earth merlyn needs to waste time rewriting something he has already put a considerable amount of effort into rewriting in the first place. Ever heard the advice "Don't reinvent the wheel"? Want to think about how it applies in this situation?

>>Are those the kind of answers that attracted you to this site?

Yup! But let me highlight the keyword of that sentence, answers. Thats what attracted me to this sight. I personally don't care if they wrote a 30 page essay on computer language design and so forth or just pointed me at a 4 page man page that answered my question. The entire point of this section atleast, is for people to ask questions and other people to answer them. Certainly we should not be blind to the community aspects that have grown up around this and infact help and encourage it, but I fail to see the difference providing a one line answer or a 5 line, or even a 500 line answer, providing that it atleast meets the basic requirements of civility, which merlyns post does. It might be different if he had said 'OMG U SO ST00PID HOW CAN U N0T READ THIS UBER ARTICLE ON CLOSURES'. But Ya know what? He didn't. All he said was "I have an article on this" and linked to it.

>>I'm not under the impression, however, that he has earned the right to be smug and self-serving Self-serving? He went out of his way to help another person out. How is that remotely self-serving? Because he might possibly get something out of it? What kind of arguement is that? Would you castigate Mother Theresa because she felt good abou helping the needy, would she be self-serving? As for smug, well, I'm not merlyn. Perhaps he is smug, perhaps he's not. But considering how much time he's put into helping other people on this site, I'm perfectly willing to grant him some smugness.

As for the rest, about "unsung heroes", well, perhaps they do have better interpersonal skills then merlyn. Possibly. I personally like merlyn just fine, but then maybe I'm weird. But one thing I have noticed, is that anytime anybody mentions 'heroes' of perlmonks, tilly's and the rest of the people you mentioned names come up far more often then merlyn does.