Re: Joel on software: "I hate Perl programmers."

Discussing his opinion a few months after its initial posting, on a corner of Perlmonks and without him present only acknowledges his view of Perlmonks.

Let it rest. We all have our opinion of various languages and communities. And we'll stick to them, no matter what.

Comment on Re: Joel on software: "I hate Perl programmers." - thread.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Joel on software: "I hate Perl programmers." - thread. by techcode (Hermit) on Jun 16, 2005 at 11:31 UTC
Yes I'm obviosly new around here, and yes, I still havent seen/understanded all that PerlMonks have to offer. So? What does that mean? That I shouldnt post, ask questions, whatever? Once I readed somewhere that no question is stupid question ...	[reply]
Re^3: Joel on software: "I hate Perl programmers." - thread. by tlm (Prior) on Jun 16, 2005 at 12:20 UTC
Think about this way. If the post you quoted had been posted directly to PM, it would have gotten downvoted to hell and back, irrespective of whatever grains of truth it may contain. The downvotes would be in response to the tone and the complete lack of anything that could be regarded as constructive or even original. So why should a quotation get any better response? More specifically, why should quoting something circumvent PM's scheme to keep its content useful? If I really wanted to know other opinions about the rant in question, I guess I would have posted some brief notice in CB, along the lines "Hey, what do you folks think about this rant?", and provided a link to it. I'm sure that this alone would have gotten me plenty of useful perspectives. the lowliest monk	[reply]