in reply to Let's discuss Podmaster's Signature

princepawn,
even though you've been a member of Perlmonks for a long time, you still do not seem to read replies to your posts, nor do you seem to know how the reaping of nodes goes.

mrpilot considered your node for deletion, and at least three other people also voted "delete" on your node, with noone else voting "keep". Thus your node was reaped.

As a reply to your node, I already mentioned that this is a personal matter between you and PodMaster and that it should be best handled outside of the monastery or outside of the public side of the monastery.

There was some short discussion on what "obscene" is supposed to mean, and no dissenting opinion was voiced to that PodMasters signature is not obscene.

Other knowledgeable monks also already showed you many good ways how to hide the signature from your view, so that you might be less offended by it.

Of course I let my personal opinions on this matter influence - no drive - me, because I do not share your view that it is necessary to force any change in this situation.

Another monk mentioned in the CB that maybe your last post was a failed attempt to promote your module, and while I thought it a good joke the last time, I find your repeated non-sequitur mention of your module annoying (except if it were part of your signature, which it isn't).

perl -MHTTP::Daemon -MHTTP::Response -MLWP::Simple -e ' ;    # The  
$d = new HTTP::Daemon and fork and getprint $d->url and exit;#spider
($c = $d->accept())->get_request(); $c->send_response( new   #in the
HTTP::Response(200,$_,$_,qq(Just another Perl hacker\n))); ' #  web

[download]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Let's discuss Podmaster's Signature
by bart (Canon) on Jan 06, 2004 at 12:21 UTC
    As a reply to your node, I already mentioned that this is a personal matter between you and PodMaster and that it should be best handled outside of the monastery or outside of the public side of the monastery.
    I disagree. Let me translate princepawn's question for you: "Is this kind of foul language acceptable for a monk's signature? Any monk's?". It is actually unrelated to PodMaster's person, nor limited to this one, particular, signature. It is about a general rule for signatures.

    I won't say anything about the same kind of language in the middle of a post. A signature is something different, as it's repeated over and over again, and totally unrelated to the thread it is in. Therefore, maybe some stricter rules should be applied.

    If I didn't know Dominus is a very polite guy in general otherwise, I'd find this kind of exclamation more objectionable.

[reply]

      This comes closest to my thinking on the subject...

      PerlMonks has procedures for dealing with "naughty words" in node contents and they work pretty well, mostly using peer pressure to keep the quantity of such relatively low, so that they don't appear to be much of a problem for most people (and certainly a great many monks would seem to have little problem with a much higher frequency).

      My major concern was a few mis-guided MIS/IT departments having some kind of naughty word counter and some monk getting noticed for surfing PerlMonks from work. PerlMonks should be a fairly safe place to visit from work, even if your MIS/IT department has gone off the deep end.

      But it appears that this may not be a valid concern, at least as far as the s-word is concerned, since I haven't seen any complaints over the past year due to PodMaster's signature.

      In any case, the only way PodMaster's signature would be changed would be through peer pressure, and princepawn has made it certain that such will never happen.

      I'd rather not have PerlMonks language subset degrade into "locker room" range. And princepawn's actions make me fear that some will increase their use of "naughty words" in reaction.

      Please, let's try to keep PerlMonks somewhat close to "professional" in tone most of the time.

                      - tye
[reply]
        My major concern was a few mis-guided MIS/IT departments having some kind of naughty word counter and some monk getting noticed for surfing PerlMonks from work. PerlMonks should be a fairly safe place to visit from work, even if your MIS/IT department has gone off the deep end.

        that was probably me, as i noted in non-business language. i smoothed things out with info security that time, and they never bothered me again. since that contract ended, i've moved on to other clients and have not experienced anything similar.

        ~Particle *accelerates*

[reply]
Re: Re: Let's discuss Podmaster's Signature
by ysth (Canon) on Jan 06, 2004 at 18:49 UTC
    mrpilot considered your node for deletion, and at least three other people also voted "delete" on your node, with noone else voting "keep". Thus your node was reaped.
    I believe the monk who considers the node is the one cited, even if they voted keep or edit (or didn't vote at all). The actual monk who performs the deletion is not publicly revealed.

    Update: Corion informs me that the deletion is automatic. I'd assumed that since edits would have to be manual, deletetion would be also.

[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion