I think you've touched on an important point, specifically the dangers of making assumptions and forming opinions without being willing to revise them.

And while I agree with rchiav that no should be forced to change, I'm reminded that people can change and that they can change the way people perceive them.

As an example, a certain monk of our acquaintance had gathered a reputation for posting some potentially interesting problems, but doing so rather scathingly. In turn, he became the target of voting similar to the type discussed in the nodes you mentioned. Indeed, he retired from the community rather publically.

Fortunately, he later returned, clearly having thought things through. He's made a genuine effort to contribute and has done so rather admirably. While I haven't always agreed with his postings or his views, I've learned a great deal from him and I believe he's managed to change the way some people perceive him.

In fact, one senior monk was so outraged by this monk's previous behavior that he swore (in CB) never to respond to any of this monk's posts again. I recently noted that the two of them have been carrying on quite civil discussions in their posts.

It's almost as if they're starting to gain modicum of mutual respect for each other.

(Sorry for being vague regarding who, but I don't believe that ID'ing the person would be fair at this point.)

I mention the story because this monk has made a concerted effort to change and to contribute. He's clearly toned down his rhetoric and focused on the real goals of the Monastery in (most of) his recent posts.

Remember, we're here to help others learn Perl and to learn effective Perl. We're here to help each other succeed and to help Perl succeed.

Furthermore, remember that your words have a larger audience than the person who posted the node you're commenting on. Indeed, turnstep recently reminded us at the full range of our audience. If you were disappointed or concerned about the points he reported, then I urge you to actively seek ways to correct those outside ideas.

I challenge every monk who really cares (which should leave out the trolls) to:

• To meditate on the difference (if any) between their impression of themselves and the one held by their Monasterial (and outside) colleagues.

  Make this an honest assessment. If there is a difference, then actively look for ways to bring the two points of view closer.

  If there's a possibility that there's a difference, then work on your presentation.

• Consider carefully before posting anything that could be seen as disrespectful. I do not believe there are many cases where disrespect is warranted and fewer in a community supposedly devoted to technical information.

• Think twice before mentally classifying anyone as a troll, as clueless, as heartless, as mean spirited, or any other form of name calling. Name calling never helps.

• Follow-up when voting down. At the very least, send the poster a private /msg.

That last point deserves a little more expansion. A certain monk recently voted a node of mine down and was kind enough to privately tell me why. We discussed it and it became clear there was a difference of interpretation in what I'd written. I pointed out my intent and we both learned something from the experience.

To date, this monk is the only one who's every contacted me after voting me down. Since I've been voted down a lot, I find this disturbing, for it means that we're (generally) espousing an ideal (feedback on downvotes) without actually implementing it. If you agree with this ideal, then I challenge you to practice it.

Personality voting comes in many forms. Most of it is wrong...however, sometimes, a downvote contains clear feedback to the poster; feedback that can be incorporated if the poster a) understands why the downvote happens and b) cares to adjust their behavior.

Earlier, I mentioned a monk who adjusted his behavior and applaud his success. I would hope others facing similar frustrations could learn from that example and be willing to demonstrate the same amount of courage.

Not everyone who leaves returns. And, we are a poorer community for that. Everyone contributes in some way to the outside opinion of the Monastery. Make that contribution count.

Furthermore, be open to the possibility that you may need to change, to adjust, or even to apologize. And then fit your deeds to the action.

--f