in reply to typo in camel 3

Be sure to send this (and all) typos in O'Reilly books to bookquestions@ora.com.

-- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker

update: to the morons who voted this down three points in the first five minutes of its life, get a clue, please. Two or three of these people are personality voters rather than people voting based on merit: 
jcwren
footpad
zdog
ar0n
ZZamboni
TStanley
damian1301
PsychoSpunk
Masem
geektron
Macphisto
knight
mkmcconn
j.a.p.h.
adamsj
vaevictus
dusk
premchai21
voyager
bsb
stevens

[download]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: typo in camel 3
by OzzyOsbourne (Chaplain) on Apr 10, 2001 at 17:58 UTC

    I didn't bother with this post (no ++ no --) because it was factual, simple, and correct. After you updated and made accusations, here, I --'d it. If you are correct, and 1/7 of these people are guilty of personality voting, you've fingered 6/7 of them unnecessarily. That's not right. Otherwise, I have no issue with your original post.

    -OzzyOsbourne

[reply]
    A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.
Re: Re: typo in camel 3
by geektron (Curate) on Apr 11, 2001 at 09:34 UTC
    is said list really appropriate?

    i, like Ozzy, hadn't even looked at this node ( until now, anyway )

    and a mass condemnation like this IS likely to have the effect Ozzy describes.

    yes, you said '2 or 3' of a list of 21 people. that's more condemnation than needs to be spread around, IMHO.

[reply]
Re: Re: typo in camel 3
by premchai21 (Curate) on May 12, 2001 at 05:00 UTC
    Was looking for node. Realized it had reference to self. Searched for self. Found this. False accusation. Now voted down.

    'Nuff said.

[reply]

In Section Meditations