|Keep It Simple, Stupid|
A few have started to demonstrate a zealous assumption of profound incorrectness ...
Assuming the cap fits; I've picked apart and highlighted the flaws, fallacies, misunderstandings and outright falsehoods from enough of his posts going back several years; that I've arrived at the point of "assuming profound incorrectness" on certain subjects -- threading, memory, sorting, random numbers, syntax; to sum up: programming -- but it doesn't stop me reading what he writes, carefully, before either downvoting or denouncing it. Or both.
But, with the monastery's approval -- which basically means yours -- I'll return every downvote I ever took from him, from my own tally, on one condition: he posts a single, complete, non-trivial, working Perl(*) program that he has written. How hard could it be?
Update: And just to keep things honest; it has to be an appropriate response to a new SoPW.
(*)I'd say, any language, but let's keep it focused.
With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I'm with torvalds on this
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Agile (and TDD) debunked