in reply to Why I won't be contributing to the 'CPAN rating system'; and why you don't want me to.

Thanks for taking the time to reply. Let me try to address some of the above, a warning, I'm not as articulate as others.

We started off here, I pointed out that there was a system like the one you described:

"A simple: "Please rate your experience of this module: bad [1 2 3 4 5] good" would suffice."

However you seem to have changed stance on this above:

"It is numerically & statistically useless. What does 4 1/2 stars mean?"

Basically, not only are you asking me to not just express my opinion, but rather work up a technical discussion to support my position -- which is often as not based upon instinct rather than rigorous discovery(*); but to do so in support of a system that you feel has merit and which I feel has less than none.

I simply said I'd welcome your technical review of modules. It seems your stance on the existence of a rating system has change somewhat from your initial statement. I'm not here to try to convince you of anything. I think more technical critique would be advantageous to the system. I feel your opinion would be worthwhile, I've read many of your posts providing help, advice and posting questions to help others in the right direction with their problem/project. I still feel that this would be the case, especially if contributions were "venom" free.

Some of your questions I can't answer, I'm not currently and haven't been part of the team providing the service. The system as it stands is far from perfect, but for those with the time and the interest it's something which can be improved. http://cpanratings.perl.org/about.html

I find that more often that not module authors/developers welcome patches/pull requests to fix bugs or otherwise improve software. There are some (in)famous counter examples where people don't work well with others, resulting in forks or Perl etc. Perhaps linguistically 'community' wasn't the ideal term to use. Merlyn once talked about such things as tribal entities rather than communal. I think he had a point. FWIW, I'm not offended by your post.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: A reply.
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Aug 08, 2016 at 09:54 UTC
    It seems your stance on the existence of a rating system has change somewhat from your initial statement.

    No. I would support a rating system that had some merit; the existing one which I was unaware of at the time, does not.

    If your point is that my suggestion of 1..5 is effectively the same as 5 stars, you are correct. My throw away suggestion for a possible rating system that I "knew would never be implemented", was ill thought through and inadequate; as testified by my analysis of the existing system.

    Does that mean I don't think a rating system is a good idea. No.

    It means that neither the existing system nor my off-the-cuff suggestion are worthy.

    I'm not here to try to convince you of anything.

    You've expended a lot of posts not trying to convince me of anything.

    I find that more often that not module authors/developers welcome patches/pull requests to fix bugs or otherwise improve software.

    That is a completely different subject.

    A rating system is -- should be -- to allow users to inform other users of their experiences; and perhaps allow those other users to avoid repeating their mistake of -- for example -- building their design around a module that will ultimately come back to bite them in their arse.

    Most of the modules I reject for my own use, that rejection takes a matter of minutes and happens before I even download it. It is a quick, gut driven appraisal to cut down the list; and is entirely inadequate for any kind of review or rating. I'm certainly not going to download and provide patches to correct all the modules I reject from consideration.

    The few modules on CPAN that I have -- what I consider -- sound and researched grounds for not just rejecting for my own use; but of sufficient strength and conviction to consider recommending against to others; are frequently modules that many others seem to find to be the best thing since sliced bread.

    My patches for Moose, Perlcritic, Readonly, PDL, Bignum, Lingua::Perlegata, Quantum::Superpositions, Acme::*; Modern::Perl, Common::Sense and probably 90% of CPAN on a gut-feel basis of those I've looked at, would be an empty archive.

    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 knew I was on the right track :)
    In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
[reply]

      "You've expended a lot of posts not trying to convince me of anything."

      Well at least they're not costing me anything ;) My initial reply on this subject was to make you aware that what you suggested exists, to point out that it is referenced from search.cpan.org, and otherwise answer some other point or question you raised, or further the conversation. You make it sound as though I should not have done so unless I'm trying to convince you of something.

      "That is a completely different subject."

      Except when the subject under discussion is something you agree there is a need for but find deeply flawed. hippo linked to the thread where the maintainers welcome help to improve the system in question.

[reply]
        You make it sound as though I should not have done so unless I'm trying to convince you of something.

        No. I was happy to continue the conversation and felt it important enough to move the discussion to a more prominent place.

        I was just confused by your need to say you weren't trying to convince me.

        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 knew I was on the right track :)
        In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
[reply]

In Section Meditations