It is so tacky for people to upload their own modules to CPAN (a world-wide network of computers). Such blatant self-promotion. If the module is worth something, some interested third party could be found to upload it for them.

That's an interesting logical fallacy for someone calling my reporting of my perception of the issue a strawman.

I also think you need to stop assigning me motives when you're telling me to stop assigning other people motives. I wasn't going into sections of the site 'looking for "self-promotion"'. I was annoyed by something, and decided to ask others about it. You know, that whole discussion in a forum thing, in this section called "PerlMonks Discussion", where I thought it would be on-topic to discuss PerlMonks.

I made no distinction about "little people" or "big people" or what someone may have achieved regarding Perl or any other part of their lives. Those are your words. I simply mentioned that I think modules used by more people would be news rather than noise to more people. Those mentioned by name are, in every case, the authors of modules I mentioned as examples of widely used tools.

I think that if one wants more feedback, Meditations might be a better place to post as discussions there seem (I don't have the stats) to garner more feedback than in Perl News. I also think that people have come to expect Perl News to be a low-traffic part of the site for particular kinds of nodes. This may be a mistaken expectation and it may even only be my expectation. For those of us who read by section and plan which sections to read based on time available, finding things in surprising places can be disruptive to our reading habits. Maybe I'm alone in that regard. Maybe I'm not.

If your solution is to say that "Perl News" is a misnomer and people shouldn't follow the stated advice of:

For the latest news on what's happening in the Perl world, check out these sites:

If you have a Perl news item, please consider posting it on one of the above sites. Otherwise, you may post it in this section. Please try to avoid duplicating news.

The whole issue with the label of "news" is that it connotes that something is objectively reported. Very few people can objectively report on their own actions. What you get when you release subjective material as news isn't really news but propaganda. Yes, I include most web journals, TV shows, newspapers, radio shows, or whatever that do the same thing as the same thing. Either it's news, it's commentary, or it's propaganda. If you want a generic word for all of it, "reports" or "happenings" come to mind. "News" carries information with it that your description of the section simply doesn't seem to me to support.

You seem to have confused the word "news" with the word "journalism" (def'n 3). "Did you hear the news? I got engaged!"

news: "1. New information of interest" or "2. Reports of current events broadcast via media such as newspapers or television". Clearly this isn't a TV station nor a newspaper. IMO, it isn't much like either of those. So I say we go with def'n 1.

[Full disclosure, I was not involved in the production of the Wiktionary page defining "news", nor did I consult it nor any other source as to the definition of "news" when I wrote that I thought the important characteristic here should be for it to be "interesting". So the suspiciously strong correlation to the definition's "of interest" is merely suspicious. And, yes, Wiktionary was the first (and only) resource I subsequently checked.]

Further, the individual words used to describe in section titles here have repeatedly been shown to not be of paramount importance to the purpose of the sections (usually when somebody focuses on one such word too intently).

In the case of Perl News, I think the purpose of the section has been trying to find itself and the site documentation has not really declared that discovery a success yet. So my comments are based on what I see the section being used for, how I see others (to some small extent) approving and disapproving of said uses, and what I think would work well.

Certainly, an interesting release announcement (that shares insights) could be placed in Meditations. But, given that the (usually rather uninteresting, usually even "dry") release announcements for Perl itself usually end up in Perl News and that release announcements are very much "time based", I like the idea of things that are primarily release announcements being put into Perl News for the small gain in consistency. A node that is primarily sharing insights but that also, secondarily, includes the announcement of a release, I would somewhat prefer to end up in Meditations.

I certainly agree with you that it would be inappropriate (rather pointless) for a release announcement that contains no more than what is provided by http://search.cpan.org/recent (the name, version number, module "tag line", and author (encoded in the URLs)) to be posted to Perl News. The more interesting the additional material included, the less inappropriate it becomes.

And I agree that posting for the sole purpose of self-promotion is a bad idea (such a bad idea that it doesn't happen much).

But I don't want to try to require the practicing of journalism nor require that something be "of sufficient interest to the public or a special audience to warrant press attention or coverage" (newsworthy -- the wikt:// def'n frankly sucked).

- tye        

In definition #1, the "of interest" is just as key as "new information" is.

My concern isn't with the section's use varying or topics meandering. It's purely about noise. A quality write-up, even from an author, about something that's actually interesting would be welcome in my eyes.

As a concrete example, since merlyn's article archive is really useful and often cited and he was the one most likely to know where it moved, I'm really glad he told us where to find it. The quality of the resource had already been established, and the news was that it was moving. It reminds me of all the trouble people went through to find another big archive of knowledge recently and put a copy on the Monastery for posterity.

My concern with the slow-moving section being used for self-promotion isn't because I think self-promotion is evil or because I think a module author or article author is necessarily incapable of posting a good article about his or her own work. It's because people tend to be very poor judges of their own work's importance, especially before they get feedback. If young projects few care about start getting regular root node coverage in Perl News, then the nodes I'm looking for in that section become less of the whole. The site and especially that section become less useful to me. Call me Barney Fife, but it's one weed I'd like to nip in the bud.

The whole issue with the label of "news" is that it connotes that something is objectively reported.

No, "news" refers to descriptions of events. I believe that releases of modules do not qualify, depending on how important the change to a module is to how we use Perl. The identity of the person doing what you're complaining about -- conflating "Perl News" with "CPAN activity" -- does not enter into this judgement, in my opinion. I would not recommend being frightened by self-promotion, rather than by lack of participation or ability to parse the names of the sections of sites such as this.

If you make a habit of that, you lose XP.

I thought XP wasn't suppose to matter?

And indeed it doesn't matter, if one creates a new account for each post (as happened in the cases discussed here).

Perl 6 - links to (nearly) everything that is Perl 6.

I think JavaFan's reply deserves a sarcastic award for "A Commanding Grasp of the Subtle". moritz is also guilty of oversimplification but to a much lesser extent.

I thought XP wasn't suppose to matter?

• JavaFan: "I can't believe she broke up with me."
• Friend: "It doesn't matter."
• JavaFan: "Whew. And I almost canceled the hotel reservations."

And that Perlmonks actively promotes to not cast downvotes?

The PerlMonks site actually "actively" awards you XP for casting downvotes. (Of course, there is more to the story than just that.) So it makes no sense to imply a conflict between what the site en/dis-courages and a statement of fact that downvotes sometimes happen. (And note that such a statement of fact is not necessarily an appeal to encourage the casting of downvotes.)

And indeed it doesn't matter, if one creates a new account for each post (as happened in the cases discussed here).

Based on clarifications provided by the person who raised the discussion, "the cases discussed here" constitute 1/3 of the 15 most recent postings to Perl News. But I'm only aware of one person who has created a new account for themselves and then posted to Perl News recently. So I think at least s/(?=the cases)/one of / is in order.

But I also disagree that downvoting (and/or loss of XP) doesn't matter in the case of the person moritz is obviously thinking of (and I disagree that "one create[d] a new account for each post" is completely accurate). I believe downvoting had some impact (probably both positive and negative impacts on the situation).

And I was sloppy and used "lose XP" as shorthand for more than just the literal losing of XP. "Incur disapproval" might be a more accurate expression for it, which can be manifested in the loss of XP, lowered "reputation" score on a node, words of discouragement in replies, /msgs, or in the CB, and more subtle interactions.

- tye