in reply to Re: OT: Erudil? (Re: 2 Posts Lost over the years that you might enjoy)
in thread 2 Posts Lost over the years that you might enjoy

This lost post was close to 10 years old. That's the only reason why I re-posted it.
Unlike cars, old PM nodes don't rust. All of Erudil's ten year old classic nodes remain in pristine condition today. There's no need to repost them.

More useful would have been to post a link, along with a commentary or analysis of how much you love it and why you think it's a classic. Some examples of folks doing that sort of thing that spring to mind are:

I suspect there are better examples of this sort of thing, but can't find any right now. If anyone knows of some nodes that highlight or give a commentary on one or more old and classic PM nodes, please let us know (this sort of thing is commonly done on Perl Monks home nodes).

  • Comment on Re^2: OT: Erudil? (Re: 2 Posts Lost over the years that you might enjoy)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: OT: Erudil? (Re: 2 Posts Lost over the years that you might enjoy)
by locked_user sundialsvc4 (Abbot) on Feb 23, 2011 at 20:52 UTC

    Well, perhaps we ought to (see if Vroom is willing and...) add a section on “PerlMonks Classics.”

    Maybe one of the reasons why I suggest this is ... let’s face it ... the URL right now suggests that I am adding to node # 889,752.   That’s a very big number.   There are probably thousands of users of this site who have never heard of these “old” posts, and who never will.

    Heck, if a post wanders off the first page of Seekers or Meditations, how many of us will actually know that it ever existed?   (My hand is certainly not raised.)

      I don't think the answer is to try to repost the content of someone else's old nodes, regardless of their rep.

      I know you probably meant it tongue-in-cheek, but.... there will not be any new section for "classic posts". (And btw... "vroom" is now called gods.)

      Now, part of the charm of PerlMonks is the deep, seemingly endless labyrinth of interesting stuff. Discovering it for yourself is one of the more enjoyable aspects of the site. The line — which at times seems quite blurry — between officially sanctioned content (i.e. PerlMonks FAQ) and user-contributed content can be fun to navigate. (Smack in the middle of that zone are Tutorials and Categorized Questions and Answers. I refer you to Understanding and Using PerlMonks in particular.)

      But in general, there is a subtle but important principle which distinguishes PerlMonks from a blog site like use.perl: user posts are contributions to the site as a whole. Yes, you retain the right to edit and get credit (unless you're an anonymous coward); but every post reflects upon us all as community. Every post is a brick in the wall.

      There is a place for each user to be lord of his own domain: his homenode (and scratchpads).

      So some users might not ever see camel code? You know — that's not the end of the world. But any user who sticks around for a while and goes exploring will probably find it. Have faith.

      And consider that there are already plenty of ways for users to find out about great old nodes, notably Selected Best Nodes.

      I stand, very adamantly, by my assertion that reposting the content of someone else's node, just to bring attention to it, is inappropriate and should not be condoned. It would be one thing if he had added some kind of critical analysis, but he didn't even do that.

      I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.
[reply]

In Section Meditations