The node I'm replying to was emptied (including the title) by the author, apparently in regret after several people replied stating that they couldn't understand it (and/or because a few people downvoted it).
See (tye)Re: why a nodelet can be kept against author wish? for a longer description of my position on such things. In short: We all make mistakes, there is no good reason to try to hide your mistakes. I often learn more from peoples' mistakes than from anything else. I appreciate seeing a mature correction when a mistake is discovered, leaving the original mistake visible (perhaps with a line through it or such) so the replies below it make sense.
Deleting your node content is an immature act like "taking your marbles and going home" because you weren't winning. It leaves an ugly mark at the Monastery (replies suddenly with no context).
I have heard a lot of people express (usually strong) disapproval of such behavior and I don't think I've ever heard anyone praise it so, when I found the node had been quite quickly reaped (with a justification of simply "empty"), I wondered if those who voted for reaping realized that they were helping the author to try to "change history" and just make their mistake "go away" and, in doing so, were more likely to encourage future acts than to discourage them.
So I've unreaped the node for several reasons:
- I feel strongly that such nodes shouldn't be reaped
- I'm hoping to call attention to this problem and get more feedback on how it should be dealt with
- I feel it was reaped too quickly and worry that those who voted to reap it hadn't considered the consequences
- I want the original author to have the chance to change their mind and restore the node or at least insert a mature retraction in place of the sulking blankness
- I'd like to upvote the node (I haven't voted on it) once the author comes to his or her senses and makes a more mature and less rude update to it
- and, yes, I don't think the author should get off so easy (once a node is reaped, the author can no longer get or lose XP from votes against the node) if the author refuses to take the mature route
I'd also like to encourage people to not downvote the node. I'm sure it will get several more downvotes despite my request. But I'd rather give the author some time to recover from whatever emotions lead to this retraction and fix the mistake instead of compounding it. If too much time passes or the author makes it clear that they refuse to take the high road, then I will very much want to downvote the node. But I'll check
Worst Nodes first and not add to the dogpile if I think too big of one has already formed (which I sincerely hope doesn't happen).
I also don't think it is appropriate to approve an empty root node and such certainly shouldn't be front-paged. If attention needs to be called to such things on the front page, then a PM Discussion root node about it is what needs to be displayed there.
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: |
| & | | & |
| < | | < |
| > | | > |
| [ | | [ |
| ] | | ] |
Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.