subject line changing (was Re^4: blandness is the problem, not plagarism)

(BTW: I now understand why you changed the subject altogether, since, with reference to use Perl; again, people -including me- do that all the time there. But here it's generally discouraged. In fact I'm surprised no one complained: it is commonly recommended that if you do so, you also keep some track of the previous subject in the new one. This is especially intended for searching purposes.)

Yes, and I find it absolutely astounding that rather than fix the search feature so that it can deal with subject line changes, the masters of perlmonks prefer to send nag messages to people who dare to change their subject line.

(My personal opinion is that this makes them seem like a bunch of noobs who just discovered the internet yesterday -- changing the subject line to match the actual subject under discussion has been one of the basic principles of netiquette for about as long as the net has been around.).

Comment on subject line changing (was Re^4: blandness is the problem, not plagarism)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: subject line changing (was Re^4: blandness is the problem, not plagarism) by jdporter (Paladin) on Mar 22, 2009 at 23:26 UTC
...absolutely astounding that rather than fix the search feature so that it can deal with subject line changes... Super Search is not broken. It searches for exactly what you tell it. ...changing the subject line to match the actual subject under discussion... The FAQ says as much. And more. ...this makes them seem like a bunch of noobs ... I think it's actually the opposite: People who change the title every time they post are very often noobs, as can be told by the titles they choose: "That's not what I said", "Solved!", "Try Java", and similar completely worthless titles. That is why they get nag messages. Between the mind which plans and the hands which build, there must be a mediator... and this mediator must be the heart.	[reply]
Re^2: subject line changing (was Re^4: blandness is the problem, not plagarism) by doom (Deacon) on Mar 24, 2009 at 07:02 UTC
I think it's actually the opposite: People who change the title every time they post are very often noobs, as can be told by the titles they choose: "That's not what I said", "Solved!", "Try Java", and similar completely worthless titles. That is why they get nag messages. I do not do that, and I have never done that, and yet I definitely have received nag messages. My impression is that you guys like the subject line to stay the same because you don't have a good way to display threading in your search results.	[reply]
Re^3: subject line changing (threaded results) by tye (Sage) on Mar 24, 2009 at 14:32 UTC
My impression is that you guys like the subject line to stay the same because you don't have a good way to display threading in your search results. Yes, we could change every place that lists nodes (doom's writeups, super search, newest nodes, best nodes, worst nodes, etc.) to separately list: the title of the node, the depth of the node, the title of the parent to the node, and the title of the root of the thread so that 99.8% of nodes end up being displayed like: (Re^4)Re^4: assosiating .pl files with perl on linux (re Re^3: assosiating .pl files with perl on linux in assosiating .pl files with perl on linux) But I don't see how that would be "a good way to display threading". If only there were some better way to represent "the summary of the subject of this node and the context" that would combine that information into one compact string, like just "Re^4: associating .pl files with perl on linux" or, in the case of a significant subject change, something like "Re^2: subject line changing (was Re^4: blandness is the problem, not plagarism)". That would be ideal. - tye	[reply]


more useful options
	PerlMonks