Re^3: Perl Monks with learning disabilities

My statement was...

It's good know something personal about a community member, as it helps bring us closer together. And, glad that you brought it up with perlsyntax's permission, so I'll definitely keep it in mind. However, ...

To reiterate, I "appreciated" the bit of information about perlsyntax brought up by perlfan. I didn't say I agree with the post. I agree with the sentiment of the post, expressing concern. I also am glad he brought it up with his permission, instead of without.

However, this in no way contradicts my statement in disagreement with "tagging" those with disabilities. I agree, bringing it up in a post in the first place is just like "wearing a star" and it probably will just draw more attention to perlsyntax's posts in the future, whether for good or bad. I don't think there's a big contradiction in my expression of appreciation for the concern (it was brought up, I might as well take it into consideration) and my disagreement about drawing attention to community members with disabilities.

---
echo S 1 [ Y V U | perl -ane 'print reverse map { $_ = chr(ord($_)-1) } @F;'
Warning: Any code posted by tuxz0r is untested, unless otherwise stated, and is used at your own risk.

Comment on Re^3: Perl Monks with learning disabilities

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Perl Monks with learning disabilities by dwu (Monk) on Nov 29, 2007 at 03:30 UTC
I don't think there's a big contradiction in my expression of appreciation for the concern (it was brought up, I might as well take it into consideration) and my disagreement about drawing attention to community members with disabilities. <advocate whose=devil>Public concern is drawing attention.</advocate> descends into meta I appreciate your appreciation of the concern, as previously stated; I've not ever appreciated the original concern (because it drew attention, not because it wasn't nice of perlfan). I appreciate perlfan's intents/motives/whatever; the means were poorly chosen, IMO. You're absolutely right that your statements don't self-contradict - I'll slyly point out that the fact you'll keep it in mind means you are tagging perlsyntax :), which is why I had/have trouble reconciling them, but as logical statements, they're perfectly sound. leaves the table	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^4: Perl Monks with learning disabilities
by dwu (Monk) on Nov 29, 2007 at 03:30 UTC

I don't think there's a big contradiction in my expression of appreciation for the concern (it was brought up, I might as well take it into consideration) and my disagreement about drawing attention to community members with disabilities.

<advocate whose=devil>Public concern is drawing attention.</advocate>

*descends into meta* I appreciate your appreciation of the concern, as previously stated; I've not ever appreciated the original concern (because it drew attention, not because it wasn't nice of perlfan). I appreciate perlfan's intents/motives/whatever; the means were poorly chosen, IMO.

You're absolutely right that your statements don't self-contradict - I'll slyly point out that the fact you'll keep it in mind means you are tagging perlsyntax :), which is why I had/have trouble reconciling them, but as logical statements, they're perfectly sound.

*leaves the table*

[reply]