Re^4: Any interest / use in a Perl-Work section? (mud)

I see that ysth has gone and ammended his node to say "Meditations is an appropriate area" instead of "Meditations is the appropriate area" so I can no longer disagree with what he stated, just comment (though I still disagree with the implication). And, no, it could not be that I simply misread his words earlier, I assure you.^*

I certainly agree with his third point (and I have no comment on his first point).

As to your first point, I find "SoPRW" even more appealing and also find "Seekers of Perl-Related Wisdom" an even better title. It gives that nudging hint that questions need not be "really" Perl questions (merely "Perl-related questions") while also not allowing people to get the impression that wildly off-topic (re PerlMonks) questions are appropriate.

I'm pretty sure that there are already clarifications that questions don't have to be "really" Perl questions. As to what other places those clarifications are doesn't really matter beyond that they are, in fact, other places, and so, clearly, are often not read.

- tye

Comment on Re^4: Any interest / use in a Perl-Work section? (mud)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Any interest / use in a Perl-Work section? (mud) by Eliana (Scribe) on Mar 23, 2007 at 07:53 UTC
Oh! I see. I did misread you both. I thought ysth was reassuring the OP that a specific post had been appropriately placed. Your disagreement makes much more sense now. (Not that you were worried :) Would you have been more sanguine had he said that 'depending on the question, meditations could be an appropriate area'? As to your first point, I find "SoPRW" even more appealing and also find "Seekers of Perl-Related Wisdom" an even better title. Oooh, yes! (btw, thanks for responding, I felt guilty pestering you over something so small, knowing how busy y'all are.) As to what other places those clarifications are doesn't really matter beyond that they are, in fact, other places, and so, clearly, are often not read. It's challenging, PM has so much information, and is therefore an incredible resource, but it can also be a little confusing or even overwhelming for a newcomer to navigate at first. (I have certainly gotten muddled more than once, and I have an in-house god to help me find what I am looking for!) I must be frustrating though for those who do know what they are doing and who work to put up the guidelines and other info we newbies need to keep hearing the same complaints and questions... So, yes, it was silly of me to suggest more clarifications. Your solution is simpler and more effective. Thanks for your patience with (another) bumbling, but well intentioned neophyte. :) Eliana	[reply]
Re^6: Any interest / use in a Perl-Work section? (mud) by punch_card_don (Curate) on Mar 23, 2007 at 12:36 UTC
Interesting thread - thanks. It leads to re-think the formulation of my question. I think there are actually only two questions: Do work-related non-programming questions/thoughts fit within the intended boundaries of PM subject matter. If yes, is there a usefulness to giving that subject its own area Yes, this is a question of how do you want to define PM. At one end of the spectrum you have "pure" Perl questions, like "what's the syntax for...". At the other end you have highly tenuously related questions like "I'm a Perl programmer, how do I change the spark plugs on my car so I can get to my Perl coder job?" Unless the brethren want PM to become a site about anything and everything, and therefore about nothing, there will be some fuzzy line along that spectrum that delineates what PM is about, and what it's not. But where to draw the line?? And, once you've done that, then comes the job of putting things in drawers. Too many specialized drawers is a pain. But so is one big heap. But if the powers that be consider that, yes, these kinds of discussions are suitable for PM, and that Meditations is the/a appropriate place for them, then perfect. That said, I would never have thought to post such questions in SoPW, even when they are questions. I think it's a good thing to have at least one area reserved for PM's raison d'etre - Perl programming. Please don't lose the P. Forget that fear of gravity, Get a little savagery in your life.	[reply]
Re^5: Any interest / use in a Perl-Work section? (mud) by sfink (Deacon) on Mar 24, 2007 at 02:37 UTC
SoPRW doesn't work for me. I can never remember what SoPW stands for, and have over time trained my brain to think "oh, right! SoPWith Camel!" and then move on, not realizing that the answer is both wrong and useless. But now I think that's kinda cool, so I'd rather the anti-mnemonic not be broken. Such weighty matters of earthshaking import...	[reply]
Re^6: Any interest / use in a Perl-Work section? (mud) by Eliana (Scribe) on Mar 25, 2007 at 03:32 UTC
Well, the same acronym could be kept since tye hyphenated 'Perl-related'. Eliana (who as of yet can only contribute to such lightweight threads! :)	[reply]