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.

In reply to Re: A reply. by marto
in thread Why I won't be contributing to the 'CPAN rating system'; and why you don't want me to. by BrowserUk

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.