I've been asking you for a very long time to stop posting erroneous speculation mixed with breezy aphorism and to maybe spend 2 minutes checking your post or running your broken code snippets or adding a relevant link or not replying where the OP already got three good answers hours before you showed up to introduce two self-glorifying tangents and half a non-sequitur that never answer the OP's question.

Not including myself at all, your posts are often corrected by some of the best monks here. It used to be polite. Then you repeatedly tried to silence downvoters and anonymous posters by eliminating same and relentlessly refused to correct/edit your broken code or stop insisting on things demonstrated to be false more than once.

And now you imply law suits? Libel is only relevant if the criticism of one is a lie.

If you were a beginner, a supplicant seeking knowledge, here then yes, your treatment would be shameful. But that's not the case, is it? You endlessly let us know that you are a seasoned pro and all programming tasks and languages are easy for you when you cannot even type a goddamned # Perl comment correctly let alone give a technical answer to a technical question that plenty of monks in their first year of Perl and monkhood are doing just fine…

You seem like a nice enough person. I cannot fathom how this slow motion trainwreck is mysterious to you. How you claiming to be a peer of software veterans somehow negates the need to spend 30 seconds running your code to see how broken it is. How you think it would be different for anyone besides you who acted the same way here for years on end. It was once a mystery I was interested in solving. Not any more.

Write posts that a 30 year hacker who understands PerlMonks culture would write. AKA, on point, without error, and helpful at least most of the time or continue to enjoy the downvotes and corrections that you earn.

A week from now on should be enough to do so!

> Find a way to stop it.

Are you trying to tell us we have to "stop it" or you'll sue us?

PM history buffs may remember this classic threat from 2015:

Gentlemen, perhaps a few of you ought to know some of the things that I have been told ... quite unsolicited ... by professionals in the field: “you could own PerlMonks, you know, and probably Tim Vroom, for defamation of character and public slander.” (I even had a London Barrister contact me, again, unsolicited, and specifically offer to track down BrowserUK all the way across The Pond and to haul him in front of Her Majesty’s Court on my behalf.) I have declined these offers. So far. (I don’t like lawyers.)

Even scarier than being hauled across the pond by an “‘unsolicited’ London Barrister”, was this terrifying threat to report BrowserUk's un-British rudeness to Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II !

So Sundial revives an old thread and sure enough gets a half dozen of the most senior Monks to respond, Pavlovian whistle at its best.

Ferchrissakes LanX and Eyepops and YourMother and the rest of you, will you PLEASE STOP FEEDING THE TROLLS!

Whether he is malevolent or incompetent or a dotard, all you do each time he opens his mouth is amplify what he says. Duh.

Disagree. Said why before. Short version: if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it. If an optically senior monk causes a disaster or cost overruns or whatever on some company contract, it reflects badly on all senior monks and Perl in general and not in some vague, existential numbering way but in an actual: "Wow, this is the best Perl has to offer? God, no wonder everyone hates it."

New reason: the anonymous hate posts are often embarrassingly stupid, adolescent, and illiterate. It's fruitless to respond to them. A clarification of context about their idiocy is valuable to show the whole house isn't built of sniping cowards.

The solution to pollution is dilution!

I've said this before, too: I can't picture anyone taking away a sundial post as the solution to implement, when there are a dozen good posts with informative demos of good code. Just keep posting good answers and the problem will be solved, without drawing any more attention to the poseur.

Cheers




The way forward always starts with a minimal test.