in reply to [OT] How about an Off Topic Section?

If we had an OT section here, what would we use the rest of the internet for? ;)

Dum Spiro Spero
  • Comment on Re: [OT] How about an Off Topic Section?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: [OT] How about an Off Topic Section?
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Jun 05, 2015 at 19:27 UTC
    If we had an OT section here, what would we use the rest of the internet for? ;)

    Reference. Whilst expanding our minds and skills into areas complimentary to Perl.


    With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
    Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
    "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I'm with torvalds on this
    In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Agile (and TDD) debunked

      Whilst expanding our minds and skills into areas complimentary to Perl.

      If that was what would be in an OT area, it would have my vote as well. Is it pointless to speculate that the potential "anything goes" interpretation of OT might be the sticking point? Would Related Topics be more acceptable? My cursory scan of the list didn't see anything like that.

      Dum Spiro Spero

        What we need is a workable/working keyword system, so that rather than throwing things into a catch-all "off topic" bag, each post can have keywords that indicate the topic. New posts would maybe have the 'Perl' keyword selected by default. :-)

        But lacking that, the stand-in is, and has always been, the free-text title of the post. It's quite effective. "Keyword searching" works very well indeed (if not 100% perfectly according to 100% of monks' wishes).

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

        I guess that there would have to be some rules. Some indication of what is an acceptable off-topic and what is not.

        As a first filter; I would suggest: "MUST be programming related." It's a catch-all, with doubtless many possible (deliberate or otherwise) misinterpretations. But still a valuable starting point.

        I'd probably add a list of specific, verboten subjects. The big four + politics would probably cover off most things; but its a minefield.


        With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
        Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
        "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I'm with torvalds on this
        In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Agile (and TDD) debunked