Not Perl questions

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Not Perl questions by adrianh (Chancellor) on Jun 19, 2003 at 15:14 UTC
I think it's a bad idea. Sorry :-) In my experience nothing ruins a focused online community quicker than encouraging off-topic posts. There are many other places people can discuss non-Perl topics. The people who are interested in those things here will also be in those other communities. If you're interested in Java go to javajunkies; If you're interested in CSS go to css-discuss; etc. If we encouraged off-topic posts we would be adding noise to perlmonks that many people would not be interested in, and reducing the utility of other communities by "stealing" useful content.	[reply]
Re: Re: Not Perl questions by nite_man (Deacon) on Jun 19, 2003 at 15:43 UTC
Maybe you are right. I've never had experience like your. Maybe I've really got used to our monastery and others resources seem for me a little uninviting ... -------------------------------- SV* sv_bless(SV* sv, HV* stash);	[reply]
Re^3: Not Perl questions by adrianh (Chancellor) on Jun 20, 2003 at 12:48 UTC
Maybe I've really got used to our monastery and others resources seem for me a little uninviting ... Most places are a little uninviting until you get used to them. I was put off perlmonks for the longest time because of the ghastly user-interface (sorry - my usability hat is showing :-). I'm now glad I took the effort. To argue it from the opposite end - you'll get far better answers to non-Perl questions in more appropriate groups. While I'm sure there are many people here who know a fair bit of Java/CSS/whatever I can guarantee that there are more people with more expertise in an online community that is explicitly focused on a particular topic. Ask a CSS related question here and you're not going to get Eric Meyer pitching in an answer, you will on css-discuss. Just like you're unlikely to get a (probably fairly pithy :-) response from merlyn or Abigail-II if you asked a Perl question on, for the sake of a random example, the apache users list. Even worse, you might get an incorrect or non-optimal answer. Just because somebody knows a lot about managing apache, doesn't mean they know a lot about perl (or vice versa).	[reply]
Re: Not Perl questions (no!) by grinder (Bishop) on Jun 19, 2003 at 16:27 UTC
The general concensus is no, not a good idea. This subject has come up a number of times before. A quick search on "off topic question section" lead to the following threads: Off Topic section "Off Topic" Section? Off topic section? And these threads in turn point to others... Personally, I find nothing wrong with a node correctly prefixed with [OT]... I can always choose to skip it if the rest of title doesn't tempt me. And if it's "near Perl", then it's not really off-topic, is it now? _____________________________________________ Come to YAPC::Europe 2003 in Paris, 23-25 July 2003.	[reply]
Re: Re: Not Perl questions (no!) by allolex (Curate) on Jun 19, 2003 at 16:52 UTC
What grinder said. ;) If I know the answer to OT posts, I like to help (e.g. this thread). If not, then it's no loss to the Monastery, which has an admirable focus on Perl and issues directly related to it. And then there's the PM Chat, which is another story altogether. :) -- Allolex	[reply]
Re: Not Perl questions by diotalevi (Canon) on Jun 19, 2003 at 15:02 UTC
No. There are already more categories than are sane - further subdivision only makes it more difficult for the new (or habitual) user. It took me a week to figure out the current sections for basic site usage. This only makes the site harder to use.	[reply]
Re: Not Perl questions by Mr_Person (Hermit) on Jun 19, 2003 at 15:08 UTC
I don't really think that would be a good idea. While it's okay to have the occasional off-topic discussion, it usually starts off as something that is at least related to Perl or how to integrate those technologies with Perl. Having a section like that would encourage posting questions that really have nothing to do with Perl at all, and could probably be better answered on another discussion forum (For instance, there's JavaJunkies for Java).	[reply]
Re: Not Perl questions by daeve (Deacon) on Jun 19, 2003 at 17:51 UTC
Though I like the "concept" of what you're suggesting, I'm afraid that the reality could/would cause a defocusing of the community. However... How about the addition of a links page or area strictly for those helpfull sites that we all visit/use? I know that the site already has an Outside Links area but these are primarily perl and perl related links (and as this IS perl monks is as it should be) but I'm thinking of a section devoted to links to nonperl but useful programing and related sites. One possibility is a free for all(members?) to post links page or area with voting on whether a particular link stays or not? my $0.02 Daeve	[reply]
Re: Not Perl questions by EvdB (Deacon) on Jun 19, 2003 at 14:46 UTC
A good idea. Sticking to the monastery metaphore it could also be called something like "Outside the Gates" or maybe "Blasphemy". It should still remain close to perl though, and not just an off topic area. UPDATE: It would appear that my fellow monks do not agree - so let me put it this way. People will post off topic - it just happens. If there is a clearly labeled area for this then it is much easier to avoid and ignore. As it is now there are often off topic posts which meet quite a lot of hostility in the regular areas. This is a shame as on the whole the monastery is a very friendly place. Also with an off topic area any out of place posts in the regular areas can be moved over to it without annoying anyone. Call it a sin bin if you like. --`tidiness is the memory loss of environmental mnemonics`	[reply] [d/l]
Re: Re: Not Perl questions by freddo411 (Chaplain) on Jun 19, 2003 at 17:38 UTC
I believe your proposal is well considered. I have read many a node that centered around a problem on windows, problems with HTML, etc. These topics exist and are relavent to perlmonks because Perl (as glue) is often used in these contexts. Currently all questions are lumped together in SoPW, without any categorization. One has to scan the titles to discover the subject matter and to decide if this is interesting at that moment or not. The advantage of the current system is one's exposure to all aspects of Perl usage and the problems therein. This is IMHO, 'A Good Thing'. On the otherhand, if one wished to focus on one area (in order to provide wisdom) one has to scan the articles to attempt to discover ones of interest. Other web communities provide both categorization and a global view -- slashdot for example. Considering these factors, I don't favor another top level category. However, there would be wisdom in tagging nodes with a heirarchical categorization system. Cheers ------------------------------------- Nothing is too wonderful to be true -- Michael Faraday	[reply]