Re^3: [OT] How about an Off Topic Section?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: [OT] How about an Off Topic Section? by Anonymous Monk on Jun 09, 2015 at 23:37 UTC
But what are you trying to promote? Your politics? Because that is what will happen. A bunch of monks advocating and arguing about political causes. We do not need an OT section because we need more posts about Perl. Not less.	[reply]
Re^5: [OT] How about an Off Topic Section? by salva (Canon) on Jun 10, 2015 at 12:36 UTC
Well, I have the opinion that when you get together a group of people with some common interest they would probably have interesting (for them) conversations about things both related and unrelated to that common interest.	[reply]
Re^6: [OT] How about an Off Topic Section? by Anonymous Monk on Jun 10, 2015 at 19:18 UTC
An OT section is not necessary for that, because Perlmonks has been allowing people of a common interest (Perl) to have related and unrelated conversations longer than you have been a member.	[reply]
Re^5: [OT] How about an Off Topic Section? by Anonymous Monk on Jun 10, 2015 at 22:12 UTC
Also tangentially relevant: Why does PerlMonks work? and the linked article in particular.	[reply]
Re^4: [OT] How about an Off Topic Section? by Anonymous Monk on Jun 09, 2015 at 23:10 UTC
Sure, they're currently "tolerated" in the sense that undoubtedly somebody will show up to point out they're OT -- heck i've pointed it out myself And I'm sure they'll get plenty of downvotes for being OT If there was an official OT section, I agree , it would be promotional, and anyone complaining about it would be OT	[reply]
Re^5: [OT] How about an Off Topic Section? (surely downvoted) by tye (Sage) on Jun 10, 2015 at 00:45 UTC
And I'm sure they'll get plenty of downvotes for being OT Checking the most recent posts marked "OT", we get vote tallies of: `+4-6, +4-5, +3-4, +2-4 +2-2 +2-1, +7-1, +9-1, +12-0, +14-1, +15-1, +16-0, +18-0, +18-1, +18-1, +18-1, +20-1, +24-0, +26-3, +26-3, +28-0, +32-1, +48-0` [download] Only 17% even managed to garner a negative reputation, and each of those just barely so. And I'd guess that 2 of those 4 were down-voted mostly for reasons other than being off-topic. Your certainty appears to be unfounded. - tye	[reply] [d/l]