Re: Monastery Gates Suggestion for Improvement

I just checked at the Gates and on the SoPW page.

There is no ability to post at the Gates. There is on the SoPW page.

There are 6 links relevant to how to post here following the textarea on the SoPW page.

They all follow the textarea where any of us might enter our missive

As this suggestion appears to be about getting initiates to notice these items, I would suggest this information is also reformatted so the links fit neatly under the Add your question heading or even underneath the Title input field but before the textarea.

The existing layout of the information could stay

The problem seems to be some initiates are

used to other forum formats where they don't have to concern themselves with layout
quite possibly hoping for a quick fix to something and too rushed to be bothered to read the information that is there
possibly not very well versed in English so not reading or understanding the information
hitting the preview button and not looking at the result properly nor reading the information there
possibly not familiar with HTML and markup. It is, after all, possible to do Perl without the Internet and HTML as prerequisites.
not scrolling down much past the textarea once they have found it

The Monastery is not here to improve someone's English or HTML - that may occur as a side-effect but the aim is to improve their Perl.

Some initiates do take the trouble to read and understand what skill is required to make a post.

We might increase the success rate if we position the links so they are more noticeable

This is, of course, all despite the existence of a suitable link appearing below their preview when they first preview the post.

Comment on Re: Monastery Gates Suggestion for Improvement

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Monastery Gates Suggestion for Improvement by SuicideJunkie (Vicar) on Sep 11, 2008 at 21:29 UTC
Perhaps instead of "Your Text:", it should say "Format your post with HTML here:" right above the text field? I'm fairly sure that would have made my first post a little easier to get right the first time. :)	[reply]
Re^3: Monastery Gates Suggestion for Improvement by mr_mischief (Monsignor) on Sep 16, 2008 at 17:24 UTC
++ but `<code></code>`, `<c></c>`, `<spoiler></spoiler>` and `<readmore></readmore>` aren't standard HTML. A node should be posted, ideally, in MonkCode (or is that PMCode, like BBCode?). It's mostly HTML, but `<pre></pre>` is discouraged in favor of `<code></code>` or `<c></c>` and there are the other additional tags to consider. Perhaps "Format your post with HTML and the additional tags mentioned at `[id://`17558`]`:", or perhaps a more succinct node summarizing the special tags is is order?	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: Monastery Gates Suggestion for Improvement (patients) by tye (Sage) on Sep 16, 2008 at 17:47 UTC
Well, that worked exceedingly well. The notice was so prominent that you didn't appear to notice it at all. :) When you composed the above reply, you surely had Your (PerlMonks-approved) HTML-formatted text: in the suggested location (the link goes to a different node than you suggested above). Bleh, having a link in that actually interferes with navigation between the title text and the node text, at least in this browser. Blehher, the link is displayed as the bare text "Your (PerlMonks-approved) HTML-formatted text:" once you hit the "preview" button. Update: The altenately navigation-interfering / mis-rendered link removed for now. - tye	[reply]
Re^5: Monastery Gates Suggestion for Improvement (patients) by mr_mischief (Monsignor) on Sep 16, 2008 at 18:27 UTC
Re^2: Monastery Gates Suggestion for Improvement by jvector (Friar) on Sep 11, 2008 at 16:26 UTC
++ your analysis, and support your suggestions on the layout and placement of the links around the text area. Of course, to be really effective there should be a Captcha at the bottom of the 'How do I post a question effectively?' page with its entry box on the question submission form ;-)	[reply]
Re^3: Monastery Gates Suggestion for Improvement by mr_mischief (Monsignor) on Sep 11, 2008 at 16:57 UTC
I know you're joking, but I can't tell for sure if you're half serious. A check box for "I have read, understand, and accept the terms of this usage agreement.", where the usage agreement is that we will post, to our best ability, clearly-phrased questions with suitably formatted relevant code would do as much good. If you have a captcha and a captcha entry box, it only means one has to glance at the page rather than reading it. The clearest way to get points across to people about to post is to not refer them to another document at all. Pick the two or three biggest problems to address and address them directly. Have a link only for more information. Before you post: Is your question or issue specific and complete including a searchable title relevant to your post? Did you include a small code snippet (in `<code></code>` tags) that demonstrates your problem or question? Have you searched for answers with Super Search, Google, and in the Perl documentation? Read How do I post a question effectively? and the documents linked from there for more information. textarea goes here... Then, How do I post a question effectively? could reference all the other stuff, such as how to make a title more effective, where to post, how to use PM markup, how to ask questions more effectively, and more.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^4: Monastery Gates Suggestion for Improvement by jvector (Friar) on Sep 11, 2008 at 17:38 UTC
Indeed I was joking, and not even half serious ( `my $serious = int (1/2);` ). And I would concur that an inline summary rather than a(nother) link to some HowTo nodes would probably be more effective. And yes, I confess I have often clicked those checkboxes without truly having read and agreed to the T's and C's.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^3: Monastery Gates Suggestion for Improvement by jdporter (Paladin) on Sep 12, 2008 at 01:09 UTC
How about a captcha where the text image they have to type into the entry field is a screenshot of the How do I post a question effectively? page? ;-)	[reply]
Re^4: Monastery Gates Suggestion for Improvement by jvector (Friar) on Sep 12, 2008 at 08:36 UTC
That would be a lot of typing... Semi-demi-seriously one could imagine an entry form somewhat like some bug trackers which could capture the context of some questions. But that would be far too specialized (?sp) for a general about-anything question. The mind can go off on all sorts of other tangents (mine just did ... <<shake>> ) but they all interfere with the essential spontaneity.	[reply]
Re^4: Monastery Gates Suggestion for Improvement by planetscape (Chancellor) on Sep 16, 2008 at 18:11 UTC
How about a captcha where the text image they have to type into the entry field is a screenshot of the How do I post a question effectively? page? I wouldn't mind seeing the text image be that of: "If you think you're going to use `<pre>` tags � don't! Use `<code>` tags instead!" ;-) However, I largely agree with jvector, who wrote: I suspect the world is made up of those who read things first and those who don't[...] HTH, planetscape	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^2: Monastery Gates Suggestion for Improvement by sasdrtx (Friar) on Sep 12, 2008 at 11:55 UTC
It is true that the information is easily available; but personal experience tells me that what's underneath the posting box doesn't get seen much. And I agree that there are plenty of people who will ignore all advice no matter how easy and clear it is. This forum doesn't require any more formatting than any other forum. But a 500-word post with code needs formatting on any forum. The person with the answer might possibly be busy and not willing to waste their time wading through a crappy post. It behooves the seeker of wisdom to put some effort into making the question as easy to answer as possible. It shouldn't be that much of a burden to learn <p> and <code> tags. Notwithstanding the fact that on Perlmonks everybody gets answers (good ones) regardless. sas	[reply]
Re^2: Monastery Gates Suggestion for Improvement by Perlbotics (Archbishop) on Sep 21, 2008 at 13:49 UTC
Good analysis. From my point of view, this calls for a little more guidance for first time visitors (customers). Not to patronise, but to give the SoPW more orientation. It should be possible to properly express the problem without knowing a markup language. I think the SoPW textarea and the small-print deserve its own page/node. Personally, I would remove the textarea and the small-print from the SoPW pages and replace them by two prominent links at the top and the bottom of the SoPW (Now: Add your question). The same link could be used at the Monastery Gates. An unregistered user would be led to a more structured page allowing him/her to enter (draft): the question title (opt) category/tag a problem description the question (re-think the problem) (opt) a code fragment to demonstrate the problem (what have you done so far?) (opt) current/desired output of the program As a quick hack, these inputs could be decorated with a little bit of HTML and provided as a preformatted preview textarea (Your "PerlMonks-approved HTML"-formatted text) as it is now. E.g., the code fragment is wrapped into `<code>...</code>` tags, paragraphs are detected and marked up, spoilers and output is wrapped, very long text is folded (see more), Perl keywords become links to the [doc://keywords] ;-) etc. A not so quick-hack would provide feedback (preview) with the same form and more guidance. Experienced users might chose to (personal settings or simple link) continue to use the textarea with it's full markup-power as it is now. If Javascript is not condemned, a SoPW-question-WYSIWYG-editor can be conceived... Just some thoughts... I wonder if it is worth the effort? After all, some gentle rebuke by the Monks as well as exercising the virtues of tolerance and helpfulness is part of the whole experience.	[reply] [d/l]


P is for Practical
	PerlMonks