OK! So here is a list of questions for the test (do I need to add that these are a bit tongue-in-cheek? Probably!)

• I want to post some code so people can help me find an annoying bug:
  1. I cut and paste all 356 lines of code in the appropriate window, add a title like find th bug!!! and hit submit.
  2. I cut and paste my script in the form, wrap it in <code> before tags slap a title like "regexp" et voila!
  3. I extract the smallest chink of my code that causes the problem, run it (under strict and -w), wrap it in code tags, add a detailed description of the expected result and of the actual one, then use the preview to check the formatting of the post, and then finally hit submit.
• I have a problem involving flock:
  1. I type flock in the search box, thus getting the doc for the function staright out of perldoc
  2. I type flock toto in the search box, and get back a list of nodes including flock in their title, including the doc
  3. I invoque the Super Search and look for flock in the body of message, for an even longer list of nodes
  4. I try to think of a couple more keywords that would narrow down the search and I use them in Super Search for an hopefully better result
• I see a question for which I am quite sure I know the answer:
  1. I post as soon as I can a vague answer, so I don't risk making a mistake
  2. I type a proper answer, including untested code (with a warning), as fast as I can and hit submit, I know the first answer usually gets the most XPs, Yeah!
  3. I write a little piece of code showing the answer, I test it (under use strict and -w) then post it with the appropriate explanations. After all there is more in life than XP's and I don't like posting apologies (plus getting -5 rep on a post is not quite the result I hope for!)
  4. (10 000 XP and above) I state that the answer is given in one of my Web Techniques columns. I add a {grin} just in case.
• I have been downvoted 3 times in the last 5 minutes for a post I thought was uncontroversial:
  1. (10 000 XP and above) I grab the list of people on the site and post it, inevitably generating a lengthy list of rants, counter-rants and generally irrate posts, thus ensuring that a good time is had by all
  2. I suck it up like a man
  3. I downvote a bunch of loosers just to be sure I'm not the only one to be annoyed today
  4. I post a "I love Perl Monks" message to XP-whore the XP's I lost, and more
• A troll is posted, what should I do?
  1. Reply Go s***w yourself !@#$%^&* troll!, thus preventing the node to be automagically reaped
  2. (level 6 an up) Send the node to Nodes to consider do not forget to add my name to the reason, updatedownvote it (thanks arhuman), then go to the list and vote "delete" so the node can be reaped
  3. (level 5 and under) Do nothing

You might say it as: To the extent that this culture believes that acceptance is predicated on taking tests, this culture is not my culture.

Point well taken tilly. My intention wasn't to suggest a quiz or test be a core part of what PerlMonks is. What I've seen here in my brief stay is what I've seen in other technical communities. There are people that have come here and asked for help in maybe the only way they know how. And that's to basically ask someone else to do what they are trying to do. I've also seen these nodes get very negative reputations along with people responding in a way that lets them know that getting someone else to do their work for them isn't welcome here.

I have the feeling that a lot of these people never come back. Probably in part do to the fact that some of them have no desire to spend any time here if they don't have a problem to solve. But I'd also hazard a guess that some of them didn't feel welcome. Now if that's their general M.O. then they probably don't fit in with people here. But what about the people that just aren't aware? In their eyes, I'd imagine that posting a question and learning that the reputation being -8 is a really bad thing might not sit to well with these people. And all this is happening without them really knowing why.

Granted, it is partly their fault for not reading the FAQ's beforehand. But it's also something that people here have to deal with, and there's probably some people that would enjoy PerlMonks who never stick around.

With the negative responses that have been posted here, I can see why a "quiz" may not be the best thing. It was my idea for a means to an end. That end being to create an introduction for newcommers.

Would those who don't like this idea be opposed to something during the account creation process (without a test). Some reading that would possibly enlighten some of the people to the general expecatations? Answer some common questions? Present them with the FAQ?

Rich

I find that reading, thinking about, and replying to Seekers of Perl Wisdom threads is a great way of testing my knowledge of Perl, thinking up new ways of doing things, and learning from others. I'd rather consider real problems than arbitrary tests.