in reply to Re^8: [OT] How about an Off Topic Section?
in thread [OT] How about an Off Topic Section?

Re: keywords versus section. The former would, with the best will in the world, take months or years; and on past performance, might never happen. The latter could be here tomorrow.

If the need (or just desire) is acknowledged, why not do the latter until the former is available?

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
  • Comment on Re^9: [OT] How about an Off Topic Section?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^10: [OT] How about an Off Topic Section?
by Anonymous Monk on Jun 10, 2015 at 03:42 UTC
[reply]
      so many people have asked for an OT section ... We do not want your stupid OT section.

      You may not, but by your own admission, "so many people" do. It wouldn't be mine, it would be theirs. All those not so small minded, introverted and blinkered as you.

      And if there was an OT section, you could wallow around in your Perl-only sections all you like without ever having to learn what the rest of the world is up to.

      Without it, your gonna get the onerous experience of having to contend with ... wait for it ... new things. Whether you like it or not.

      Even if it is only to knee jerk a "That's not Perl" response.

      You should be pro an OT section; your just too dumb to realise it.

[reply]
        You are missing the point. It is not going to happen. You can repeatedly insult as many people as you want but it is not going to happen. Why? Because this is Perlmonks. Not OTMonks. And you are not special. Maybe you can spread your OT political propaganda in the CB instead.
[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion