|
Re: Perlmonks needs new social categories
by jdporter (Paladin) on Jul 19, 2008 at 13:40 UTC
|
I think it is best we introduce a new section on Movie Reviews
Negative. Have you read I think there should be a new Section on PerlMonks for Jobs/Modules/Quizzes/Perl6/Newbies/OffTopic/etc.?
successful Web 2.0 sites
Web 2.0 is so second millenium. ;-)
No, the thing (well, one thing) about "Web 2.0" is that content from disparate sites can be effectively structured, making the fact that the info is coming from different sources irrelevant. That means each site is free to focus as narrowly as it wants to. Indeed, one of the failures of social networking sites as a category is that there are too bloody many of them. The redundancy is astounding, and overwhelming for individuals who try to make constructive use of them. Just how many blogs do I need?
There are plenty of places you can post a movie review now, and if you do it there, you'll be on topic for the site; whereas here you'd be not only off topic but redundant. Or you could post it on your blog, along with everything else you write. Those are simply two ways to slice the content you post. Putting it here is not so much another way of slicing as it is an amputation.
For those who really want to "express themselves" on PerlMonks — may I remind you of your homenode. You have lots of freedom with your homenode. Link to your PerlMonks buddies, your favorite meditations, your favorite movies at IMDB, your other presences on the web; rant about the antiquated web 1.0-ness of PerlMonks.... All fine uses for your homenode.
Between the mind which plans and the hands which build, there must be a mediator... and this mediator must be the heart.
| [reply] |
|
|
”Between the mind which plans and the hands which build, there must be a mediator... and this mediator must be the heart”
I believe this is a quotation from the movie “Metropolis (1927)” about uniformed workers building a utopian society for their masters. There is an analogy used within the story comparing the building of Metropolis to the biblical “Babel”
And we all know what happened to the tower of Babel and their people with a single language society.
| [reply] |
Re: Perlmonks needs new social categories
by swampyankee (Parson) on Jul 19, 2008 at 13:28 UTC
|
I'm not sure I should admire your chutzpah. While perlmonks has some of the attributes of a social networking site (and some workplaces classify it as such), it's primarily a site for the exchange of technical information.
Making it less technical is not appropriate.
Information about American English usage here and here. Floating point issues? Please read this before posting. — emc
| [reply] |
Re: Perlmonks needs new social categories
by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Jul 19, 2008 at 21:14 UTC
|
Dude... a spoiler in the first paragraph without warning in a post that is so off topic as to be considered either an intentional troll or socially ... challenged? Not cool. I threw a kid (I was a kid too) against a wall for telling me Vader died in RoTJ before I saw it.
No more --s for you. Just the old /ignore and CSS treatment.
| [reply] |
Re: Perlmonks needs new social categories
by Anonymous Monk on Jul 19, 2008 at 10:14 UTC
|
Apparently you don't understand what a Hermit is (your level is Hermit) | [reply] |
Re: Perlmonks needs new social categories
by Anonymous Monk on Jul 19, 2008 at 10:15 UTC
|
like a dog needs new fleas | [reply] |
Re: Perlmonks needs new social categories
by blazar (Canon) on Jul 19, 2008 at 20:53 UTC
|
Perlmonks should consider "going social." By this I mean we need more user driven off-topic content content to help build community. That is the pattern of all successful Web 2.0 sites!
(additional emphasis by me.)
I personally believe that whether that is is the pattern of all successful Web 2.0 sites or not you should explain:
- in which sense Perlmonks "should" do so and how we "need" it - I for one don't feel like I need it as I'm on some successful Web 2.0 social sites and find that they serve wholly different purposes wrt PM, resulting mostly in a huge albeit potentially entertaining loss of time, which is not the case with the latter; should "going social" (whatever the actual way) further improve PM's value in terms of its primary function then I would buy your point, but as it stands now it barely suggests me of wanting to go social for the purpose of doing so, and most probably in an inferior way if compared to sites designed from the ground up with that objective in mind;
- how can possibly increasing OT content, and especially in a driven manner (which sound so artificial...) contribute to building a community that's by definition linked together by the common interest in Perl!
In order to do that I think it is best we introduce a new section on Movie Reviews.
(additional emphasis again by me.)
I personally believe, even if it's a minor point, that you should explain why it would be the best one: why not cars, or porn, or popular science?
Please note, incidentally, that I'm all favourable to OT content here, and have harshly argued in the past with those claiming that it should be avoided tout court. (I don't have any reference ready, but if you have the patience to wade through my writeups you'll find several of them.) Nevertheless I'm all against an OT section, let alone a specific OT section.
| [reply]
[d/l] |
Re: Perlmonks needs new social categories
by CountZero (Bishop) on Jul 19, 2008 at 18:40 UTC
|
Not Movie Reviews, we need a Recipe Exchange! (because recipes are a lot like programs)
CountZero A program should be light and agile, its subroutines connected like a string of pearls. The spirit and intent of the program should be retained throughout. There should be neither too little or too much, neither needless loops nor useless variables, neither lack of structure nor overwhelming rigidity." - The Tao of Programming, 4.1 - Geoffrey James
| [reply] |
|
|
Boil hermits alive, dip in your favorite sauce (pasta, pizza...), enjoy
| [reply] |
Re: Perlmonks needs new social categories
by Gavin (Archbishop) on Jul 19, 2008 at 09:56 UTC
|
I commend your initiative and I too feel that we should widen the scope of PerlMonks; however, it seems there is a reluctance to even consider a slightly "OT Section", never mind a full-blown “Lounge” forum.
Many have tried before over the years; do a search for “OT Section”.
To my mind, the resources available here -- namely, the wealth of knowledge gained through years of experience in all areas of IT, not to mention the other skills that have been gathered on the way -- are being wasted.
I for one would welcome the opportunity to be able to repay the help that I have been given here in other areas that I am more experienced in.
Good luck with your quest. I wish you success where others have failed.
| [reply] |
|
|
I occaisionally experience slowdowns with perlmonks. I hate to think about what all that extra "social traffic" would do.
| [reply] |
|
|
"I hate to think about what all that extra "social traffic" would do".
Maybe, but think of all the extra opportunities to bestow this and other similar words of wisdom (Poetry).
| [reply] |
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.
|
