Please realize many newbies don't always know what they're supposed to know ahead of time. (hence the term 'newbie') Instead of this habit you seem to have developed to 'welcome' many new members to our site with a RTFM-type answer, why not assume best intentions were made and just stick to pointing them in the right direction.

I have no problem calling someone out on trying to use the site as a coding service but I don't see that here and, frankly, I don't see it in a lot of the threads you respond to with your well thought out snarky remarks.

Last time I checked, this site was a community that encourages sharing and learning. One that welcomes it's new members. If that is difficult for you to do in a non-abusive way then maybe consider sticking to threads from more experienced members.

Your argument might make some sense as RTFM would be something only Perlmonks requires.

But it's common sense. Unless the OP was a newbie to life itself (which, judging from the fact he was able to type in a bunch of characters that actually made sense, he isn't), it's normal to do some research yourself instead of expecting to be spoon fed by strangers.

As for his argument "but I'm writing it in Perl", I presume the OP is sitting on a chair, using a keyboard. Taking that logic, he might as well have asked his question on a fora dedicated to furniture or keyboard layouts. I frankly cannot figure out why people who have enough IQ to type actually think that "but I write it in Perl" is enough reason to ask almost anything in this forum.

We differ here.

To me, reading enough of a site's docs to have a broad understanding of the site's standards -- and abiding by those standards -- is part of "the price of admission."

And, it seems to me, that maintaining an atmosphere which clearly communicates the community standards is about the only way one can hope to keep the standards. I'd be greatly disappointed were the Monastery to become a site swamped by all manner of un-Perl-ish questions -- how to use some browser's capabilities; why a $var doesn't seem to work in Pascal; how to set up Apache or administer a *nix system issue.

I dispute "abusive," though; sharp phrases, ironic dismissals and the like may be memorable (and I hope that's so), but I don't think "abusive" is fair or accurate.

YMMV; no problem there, but I've no inclination to accept YM without response.

Yes we do differ.

We differ on the idea of a "Price of Admission", purity smell tests on what is or isn't Perl-ish enough and making a 'memorable' impression on someone who just signed up to the site. On each of those points I feel you have been heavy handed often. I don't see how it serves a constructive purpose for an OP or other visitors considering posting a question for the first time. Are there people that try to abuse the generosity of this place, definitely but I do not think as often as your archive of RTFM replies suggest.

Can you consider someone who knows enough to put "(OT)" in the title, a newbie? I don't think so

If that is difficult for you to do in a non-abusive way then maybe consider sticking to threads from more experienced members.

You're calling the response offered by ww abusive?

<feigned abusiveness>You must have a brain tumor</feigned abusiveness>

Wow, knowing what 'OT' means separates newbies from someone who should know how to post a question after their first day or two on a forum? It must be that tricky brain tumor acting up again but I just seem to think that consistently posting sarcastic RTFM-type questions to new members, including ones that know what OT means, isn't a great way to welcome someone to a community.

But maybe you're right. It could be the brain tumor that's making me feel like being considerate and giving a new member the benefit of the doubt is actually constructive.