Re^3: Additions to the FAQ and a Community Statement

(Due to inexperience with the PerlMonks interface, my foregoing comment was posted anonymously. I am reposting it, logged in, pro forma and to ensure that the authorship is clear. —Ya´akov)

Where do you find that in my post? If that's what you understood from it, I am sorry that I didn't make it clearer. I took no sides in the debate itself, I complained about the tone and content of some anonymous posts.

Could you explain how you came to your conclusion?

As far as my enlightenment goes, I didn't make any claims about that, and, unfortunately, there are structural constraints that prevent me from being effectively "helpful" in everyone's eyes simultaneously. Perhaps I can be helpful to you in the future, whoever you are.

Comment on Re^3: Additions to the FAQ and a Community Statement

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Additions to the FAQ and a Community Statement by Anonymous Monk on Apr 16, 2013 at 12:41 UTC
Meaning does not need to be contained, in order to be implied by the writer and subsequently inferred by the reader. It is when the message inferred differs from that which was implied, that is the cause of the strife in that other thread. You picked out posts by one or more anonymous posters for particular comment, despite that the most grievous content comes in the earlier, nymed posts that incited those anonymous response. Which means that you either did not read the thread yourself, or only read in isolation, those portions of the thread to which you were pointed. And that implies you came here attempting to use the brown envelope of officialdom, to give your second-hand, pre-judicial, biased message the weight of some official judgement. You therefore compound the original problem, that of one member of the community sitting in unilateral judgement of another, by doing the same again. Not so much a policeman come to see justice, but a hired mouthpiece come to give final word to one parties view. Not a calming influence come to smooth the waters, but another cook come to stir the pot.	[reply]
Re^5: Additions to the FAQ and a Community Statement by Ya'akov (Initiate) on Apr 16, 2013 at 12:51 UTC
Well, I accept this as your opinion but I know who I am, and why I am here, so I reject it as a description of what actually pertains. I don't think there is anything I can say that will change your opinion, so I will leave it at that.	[reply]
Re^6: Additions to the FAQ and a Community Statement by Anonymous Monk on Apr 16, 2013 at 13:25 UTC
It isn't who you are that is in question. It is your motivation.	[reply]
Re^4: Additions to the FAQ and a Community Statement by ysth (Canon) on Apr 16, 2013 at 15:43 UTC
It can be useful to go to theme settings and pick something distinct to provide a visual cue that you are or are not logged in. -- A math joke: r = \| \|csc(θ)\|+\|sec(θ)\|-\|\|csc(θ)\|-\|sec(θ)\|\| \|	[reply]
Re^5: Additions to the FAQ and a Community Statement by Ya'akov (Initiate) on Apr 16, 2013 at 15:58 UTC
Thanks for that advice. The color scheme does go red but I wasn't used to that cue. I am working on the details of this interface, it's fairly complex. I will try to avoid future faux pas.	[reply]