I'd just like to nitpick at one subject that I've seen come up several times and it nearly always annoys me. Anything that more or less states that a certain monk is higher/lower than any other hits my nerves. Just a couple of excerpts from your post:

He [diotalevi] was completely within his rights as a PMonk in good standing to make that consideration.

Just what do you mean by this? That diotalevi is a Saint and therefore can do anything he wishes? Or that he has shown that he doesn't consider every node that hits him the wrong way (ie: he thinks before he acts)? Or something else entirely? What if a monk who hasn't been around as long as some of us had considered the node? Would higher monks have chastised him/her for hastily considering nodes? Or would it have been reacted upon in the same fashion? It's hard to say, but I think some hold back their opinions on such matters based on the author associated with a node.

The major resource here... is the access to developers, like tilly, tye, and Abigail-II

Okay, what makes tilly, tye and Abigail-II so special over anyone else here? I can think of a few dozen other names that might as well have been listed as well. Yes, these three monks are indeed a great resource, but putting them up on a pedestel doesn't help anything. Without an entire community contributing, a few monks wouldn't be doing a heck of a lot on their own. Even the littlest guy should have his/her name listed.

It might sound like I'm complaining about nothing or maybe that I'm putting down someone, but I'm not. To make my wish simple, it'd be changing "diotalevi considered the node for deletion." to "the node was considered for deletion" and "... the access to developers, like tilly, tye, and Abigail-II, who are willing..." to "... the access to developers who are willing...". It avoids finger pointing and praising a limited audience. Perhaps just another reason why the XP system is a disappoinment in some respects. Yes, being labeled as a long-time contributing member can be nice, but at what cost? Ignoring the little guy?

Just the opinion of the not-so-big but not-so-small guy.

If the above content is missing any vital points or you feel that any of the information is misleading, incorrect or irrelevant, please feel free to downvote the post. At the same time, please reply to this node or /msg me to inform me as to what is wrong with the post, so that I may update the node to the best of my ability.

In reply to Re: Homework threads aren't necessarily evil by Coruscate
in thread Homework threads aren't necessarily evil by dragonchild

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.