I would be delegate this question to the janitors. Do they feel a call to action on this topic? Because the burden of enforcing it, beyond moderation, falls to them.

If Perlmonks decides to get more formal in its definition of off-topic, I'd suggest the following:

• Add "Off Topic" as a moderation selection, as an alternative to "Approve" or "Frontpage"
• Add "Off Topic" as consideration category, an alternative to keep/edit/reap/nada
• Allow users a selection to suppress nodes designated OT. This could be as simple as posting possible CSS language

Updated to strike out OT stuff - what irony!

Dum Spiro Spero

---

In reply to Re: Define "On Topic" for the Monastery by GotToBTru
in thread Define "On Topic" for the Monastery by jdporter

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post; it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":





---

• 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.