Re: [MacPerl] We're all Macperlers on this bus...

[online@mactech.com (Jeff at MacTech)]

In article <mac-perl.199806171006.MAA19001@gwaihir.ee.ethz.ch>, Matthias
Ulrich Neeracher <neeri@iis.ee.ethz.ch> wrote:

>>The corollary to this is that if you do need to look elsewhere, it's on
>>comp.lang.perl.misc, which is quite hostile in tone, and very unfriendly
>>to beginners.
>
>I think that's a misunderstanding. The hostility is exclusively directed at
>people who post without doing their homework first (If you ever come across
>any legitimate question that was answered rudely, forward the evidence to me).

I guess that's sort of my point--I don't think that people who haven't
done (or _seem_ to not have done) their homework deserve outright
hostility (which they get), or that "illegitimate" questions deserve
rudeness. They're just people, and you can really ruin someone's day be
calling them names. What good does it serve? (I would say it's most
expeditious to ignore "inappropriate" questions--I guarantee you that the
inflammatory responses, and the responses they provoke, create more dead
wood that an unanswered question would. The punishment becomes more
criminal than the crime. :)  ) This is all just my personal view, of
course, but being mean to someone seeking help just feels wrong.

>>I worry that the mac-perl-toolbox v. mac-perl-bugs v. mac-perl distinction
>>might be vague enough to promote cross-posting (or confusion) and defeat its
>>own purpose.
>
>I'm pretty confident that mac-perl-toolbox can be delineated quite clearly
[etc.]

I agree overall. I guess I was thinking of situations where the answer to
"can I use flock" is "the closest you can come is a toolbox module" and
the related ilk--does the subsequent discussion then move over to the
"-toolbox" forum, and should the entire thread up to that point be
re-posted there, for the benefit of those who don't subscribe to both?
(And responses on the "main" group would continue for a while, as would
"move the discussion" posts....)

>>And I also doubt that we have to worry much about non-Mac people posting
>>hugely off-topic things
>
>You're overly optimistic here. I've seen numerous postings to mac-perl where
>people *knowingly* asked off-topic questions (even occasionally about scripts
>that could not possibly work on MacPerl)
...
>So far, it seemed better to tolerate these, but I'd prefer not to let
>this practice get out of hand.

I guess I was basing my opinion on the mac newsgroups, where it doesn't
seem to be a problem. Interesting. On the other hand, they might fall into
Vicki's category of "Mac and MacPerl users who occassionally have to work
in the Unix world". I guess I would advise not worrying about it until it
becomes a problem (as you said). In any event, providing a tolerant forum
will certainly paint the Mac and MacPerl communities in a positive light,
and maybe the casual non-Mac lurker will learn a new respect for the
platform, and spread the news....

>Yes. There's a sucker^H^H^H^Hbscriber born every minute :-)

Your broken backspace is so revealing.... :)

Chris said:
>My half-dollar: I would also like a place to discuss issues of XS/MacPerl
>source/porting issues ... such as trying to get a particular module to
>compile.  Perhaps macperl-toolbox could also include this?

This seems like a good idea. They (toolbox and porting) have in common the
need for knowledge outside of Perl, including knowledge of another
language and Macintosh programming in that language. I just wonder if we
can come up with a name which makes it clear that this is the focus--maybe
mac-perl-toolbox-and-porting?
-- 
__________________________________________________________________________

Jeff Clites                Online Editor           http://www.MacTech.com/
online@MacTech.com         MacTech Magazine
__________________________________________________________________________

***** Want to unsubscribe from this list?
***** Send mail with body "unsubscribe" to mac-perl-request@iis.ee.ethz.ch