in reply to Re: Request for an update to: What shortcuts can I use for linking to other information?
in thread Request for an update to: What shortcuts can I use for linking to other information?

The context for this is that I reported that the link they created didn't work, going on to point out that they clearly hadn't tested the link because it did not do what they assumed it would. This was ignored a few times until I highlighted the section of the URL causing confusion. Here we see more untested links and an point barely communicated. Simliar to A thought for the leader on SOPW, where I question what exactly they're trying to suggest, given their claim that their point is "obvious" to them.

"While I'd consider your eagerness to highlight (at least what you consider to be) issues is probably a good thing; you do need to do some research and present a well thought out plan rather than, what appears to be, a knee-jerk reaction to a CB discussion"

I appreciate that English may not be their first language, but unless they take the time to explain what they mean in a way that people can understand the situation will occur again, as you have pointed out. This may mean not being in such a rush to post/respond, not making assumptions, consider what someone has told you before formulating a reply, think some more about what exactly you want to say, compose a reply, preview it, test links, post.

  • Comment on Re^2: Request for an update to: What shortcuts can I use for linking to other information?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Request for an update to: What shortcuts can I use for linking to other information?
by taint (Chaplain) on Dec 04, 2013 at 17:57 UTC
    Yes, marto. I think it's fair to say, I was so focused on the tree. I was unable to see the forest. I regret not having stepped away, as I normally would have. Before responding. :/

    But then again. I also think that clarity works both ways. IMHO the man page shortcut thing should at least be better clarified on the What shortcuts can I use for linking to other information? page. Even if no other changes to it, are on the horizon. No?

    Best wishes.

    --Chris

    #!/usr/bin/perl -Tw
use Perl::Always or die;
my $perl_version = (5.12.5);
print $perl_version;
[reply]

      I agree, IMHO the existing functionality should be better documented. Perhaps the logic of what [man://foo] does could be addressed.

[reply]
[d/l]

        As someone who stands ready and willing to make the suggested corrections, I have to tell you both that I have not been able to glean what is wanted, from this thread. Please, one of you, write up a very concise statement of the fix(es) wanted.

        I am not inclined to go reading all of the references you've given, even the other thread(s?) here on PerlMonks, in order to make sense of what you're talking about.

        And taint, I strongly encourage you to finish your research and thoughts before posting. Writing things like "just a sec, I'll check...better, I'll list them..never mind" doesn't help anyone, including you. Remember that these posts will be here for years. If your post is barely comprehensible now, it will be entirely incomprehensible in 5 years. Thanks.

        I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.
[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion