Is this new change worth the time and effort that will be required in order to implement it? If it's something that is already there, just one click away, chances are the answer is 'no'.

It was to me when I wrote it. The fact that the gods and some of pmdev didnt personally see the use of it was an obstacle. As was that apparently my implementation was too full featured for the reviewers and as such i have been recommended to dumb-it-down for pretty much no good reason ive heard or seen.

Is this change likely to be appreciated by a majority of the monks, or is it something so small and insignificant that only a few will want the change implemented.

I have two issues with this point. First off _unless_ the code affects system stability this argument is moot. An added feature appreciated by a minority that is produced by that minority that doesnt affect the majority is no business of the majority. Second I would say that far far far more people will appreciate features of this site that you or I wont. I personally don't like the personal nodelet that much but I wouldn't argue it be removed. In fact Ive posted signifigant patches to it to make your browsing experience more enjoyable. The fact that those patches as well haven't been applied is a matter you should address to the gods.

Is the change likely to take up a significant amount of additional server resources that is just not worth the outcome of the change?

Until the code is put into play and profiled any answer to this question is pure conjecture and smacks of premature optimisation (maybe that feature will be too slow, cool lets optimize and leave it out!)

Is the feature something that should actually be implemented directly into the website interface, or would it be more ideal to create an external client

IMO its better implemented in PM. That way a single implementation is available to all, regardless as to how clued into the site they are.

Regarding your points about feature requests and etc. My attitude is that if you want a feature and are willing to do the work to implement it and test it then petition to join pmdev or send a msg to any of the other pmdevils. If we think you are up to the task well let you join pmdev and put together a solution. Unless the feature compromised the sites integrity then the feature should stay. Fook, weve _still_ got the stupid tick tock nodelet. (PS: the 'we' in this para represents the gods and pmdevils. A recommendation by a pmdevil to the gods about a person joining pmdev is usually respected, but naturally the gods are the final deciders.)

The real trick is convincing a god that they should apply code that they personally dont want. And by that I dont mean they dont want it included, I mean that if they have no personal desire for the feature then it can be difficult to get them to apply the patch even when it works and is tested. But thats life.

Sorry, Mr Anonymous Monk, but I did get the impression that your post was a tad negative, even though you did not mean it as such.

If you actually look at the OP there was no request for work to be done, or for implementation of any kind. I merely took advantage of the Perl Discussion page to open a discussion. I never said it was a big thing, or a significant thing, (though when the server is having one of it's bad-hair-days anything that reduces the number of clicks is a blessing), I just said that I would find it nice. If there is some agreement in the responses and it is seen by a Monk-Who-Is-Holier-Than-I, for example, who thinks "that's something I would prefer to do rather than the boring stuff I ought to do" then I may get lucky. Otherwise it doesn't disturb me in the least.

Either way I don't think it is up to A Monk Who Posts Anonymously to lay down the law as to what is to be posted and what is not...

I did get the impression that your post was a tad negative

I can understand why you feel that way, considering that his post was a reply to your Discussion. But in all fairness, he did address -- in bold letters, no less -- that part to all Monks. I don't feel it was overly negative, and since it has a positive rating, it seems many other Monks agree with me. I see it as a simple reminder that we consider our feature requests more carefully, and consider the tradeoff between utility and cost.

there was no request for work to be done, or for implementation of any kind

If your original post wasn't actually a feature request, it sure looks like one. Features require work to be implemented. If this wasn't your intention, you could have made it a lot more clear in the original post.

Either way I don't think it is up to A Monk Who Posts Anonymously to lay down the law as to what is to be posted and what is not

By the same token, I don't think it's up to an individual Registered Monk to decide that either. During my time at the Monastery, I have seen many high-quality posts from our good friend Anonymous Monk. I value his opinion. I know some people take advantage of the anonymity, but I honestly think it's more good than bad. Scorn the Anonymous Monk at your own peril.

Update: just for the record, I upvoted your original post, but downvoted your reply to AnonyMonk. I figured I should give you some feedback as to why I downvoted this node.