(Ovid - Black Diamond revisited) Re: time for new highs?

I rather happen to like this idea. I realize that I have a lot of XP, but that is due in large part to my contributions to the Monastery and not due to my Perl skill. So all things considered, while I do feel that I have earned my "Sainthood", I do worry that it may unfairly represent my Perl skill as being higher than it actually is. This, of course, raises another issue that I've been giving a lot of thought to lately.

Many of us are familiar with merlyn's /(?:in)?famous/ comment "You must be 'this high' to program Perl." Frankly, I think he is correct, but not necessarily for the reasons that others may think.

Perl is an easy language to learn. It is not an easy language to learn well (quick - what problems arise with Carp when multiple objects inherit from the same base class?). Since Perl allows the programmer to have a great deal of control -- and doesn't do a lot of hand-holding -- many inexperienced programmers shoot themselves in the foot repeatedly with the language. Unfortunately, it's so easy to create those oh-so-sexy dynamic Web pages with Perl that many people are attracted to language. This causes a problem: many people who don't know how to program learn Perl.

I'm sure many of us have heard about Matt's Script Archive. His scripts, while they seem "professional" to the inexperienced eye (hence his popularity), are terrible. Even when he patches yet another security hole, more crop up. He commits all of the cardinal sins of Perl/CGI programming, yet people keep using his stuff because they don't know any better.

So what the heck does this have to do with my Perl ability? Simple: there are so many people who use Perl that I definitely consider myself one of the better Perl programmers. I say this in interviews and can generally back it up. Yet amongst those who have a serious programming background, I am definitely a middle-of-the-road Perl programmer, no question about it. By the first category, I deserve to be a Saint. By the second, maybe a Monk. If you're familiar with the seven stages, I think I'm about the "Perl adept" level. So am I "this high" and can I program Perl? Yeah, I think I'm there, but I used to not be.

This is all a roundabout way of getting to my point. Those monks who think they haven't earned their 'points' are wrong. It's not just Perl skill, it's contribution to the Monastery. Heck, as of this writing, my third and fourth highest rated posts are Before You Post ... and Eulogy for the chatterbox respectively. Neither of those deals with Perl. Frankly, I was embarrassed by this, but fortunately, my two highest rated posts are now both very Perl-centric (and this just happened in the last week!).

In short, don't feel guilty for earning XP. It's not just about Perl, it's also about the community. If all you know is how to write simple scripts, but you help others with those, that's fine.

But I'd still like to have more levels :)

Cheers,
Ovid

Join the Perlmonks Setiathome Group or just click on the the link and check out our stats.

Comment on (Ovid - Black Diamond revisited) Re: time for new highs?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: (Ovid - Black Diamond revisited) Re: time for new highs? by danger (Priest) on Jan 14, 2001 at 12:45 UTC
This is all a roundabout way of getting to my point. Those monks who think they haven't earned their 'points' are wrong. It's not just Perl skill, it's contribution to the Monastery. Indeed. Don't forget, seeking wisdom can be rewarded as much as giving it -- as well it should be. Good questions involve thought, for both the questioner and those who would answer. A good question serves more than just the asker, and it serves more than just those with similar questions who don't ask them. It also serves everyone else who might also know the answer to then get exposed to additional answers and approaches. To be honest, if I were to voice a moderation/voting suggestion (and I guess I'm about to) it would be that ++ votes on top level 'seekers' posts should have a slighly higher probability of garnering XP in recognition of the fact that good questions (at all levels) are the driving force behind the sharing of knowledge. The only downside of higher XP's I can envision is that some might still view XP as a knowledge indicator and once they reach a certain point they may be too embarrassed to ask a seemingly 'simple' question that any <insert level here> monk should know. More recognition of questions might help alleviate any such potentially stifling effect. `$0.03 (Cdn.)`	[reply] [d/l]
Re: Re: (Ovid - Black Diamond revisited) Re: time for new highs? by PipTigger (Hermit) on Jan 14, 2001 at 15:52 UTC
I wholly agree. It seems that maybe a +=2 option for each new topic might be a simple mechanism for "extra" recognition of the inherent need (&& benefit to all by reward && open encouragement) of well thought, described, && intentioned questions. I don't thinq I said that well but I'm (ironically) not sure how to be articulate && concise. I'm trying to lern this difficult skill myself. Anyways, it might also be nice to simply allow any Monk to go to their settings && remove some of their own XP permanently in case they personally feel misrepresented or even just wish to be able to ascend through the levels again. This wouldn't require altering the system as established && could be a sort of honorable option... maybe. TTFN. -PipTigger p.s. Initiate Nail Removal Immediately!	[reply]
Re: (3) time for new highs? (opposite effect?) by ybiC (Prior) on Jan 14, 2001 at 18:19 UTC
"++ votes on top level 'seekers' posts should have a slighly higher probability of garnering XP..." I follow your logic and good intent, danger, but that looks like it would compound the issue raised by jptxs at the root of this thread. Indeed, I have been somewhat embarrassed at advancing beyond Monk(5), knowing that my Perl ability will likely never be more than "understands and applies the fundamentals". But I make a point of not hiding that fact, and do what I can to contribute to vroom's fine Monastery. Mostly that means trying to formulate good questions, voting to encourage positive posts, and enjoying the site's comraderie. So... if PM's levels were to be extended or restructured, I'll still be able to do those same things, whether it's as "Pontiff ybiC the router guy" or as "Zapped back to Scribe where he belongs ybiC". 8^D cheers, Don striving for Perl Adept (it's pronounced "why-bick")	[reply]
Re: Re: (3) time for new highs? (opposite effect?) by danger (Priest) on Jan 15, 2001 at 03:30 UTC
I follow your logic and good intent, danger, but that looks like it would compound* the issue raised by jptxs at the root of this thread.* I mention that as a risk, but meant that by actually giving higher recognition to questions (and making that publically known, say, in the Voting/Experience System), it might help people realize that XP isn't just about Perl, but overall contribution (as Ovid said), and thus not feel as if they haven't earned their XP nor to be embarassed to continue to ask questions when they do have high XP. Just an idea.	[reply]


Problems? Is your data what you think it is?
	PerlMonks