Re: why the perl docs suck



Fred@xxxxxxxx wrote:
[ . . ]
> I'll try again---
>
> I submit for consideration of everyone or no one that the guidelines
> for posting to this ng are so restrictive that deciding whether a
> certain post should be or should not be made is more tedious than
> solving the problem on one's own?
> There that's it.

I thought earlier on that concerns here were more about "sorting it
out" over the issue of what constitutes appropriate
characterization/behavior/culture rather than about the docs.

perl -e "print qq(\\n while(<DATA>) { print ok_to_query_clpm\\\\n if
/passed_the_test/; }\\n __DATA__\\n three_over_par--try_again\\n\\n)"

It does seem like a person needs (at minimum) nearly to advanced Perl
skill level before such person even has the ability to (appropriately)
ask at clpm.

OTOH, for those who would answer, it's not fair for them to be expected
to answer what's already in the faq and docs.

I see that faq's are being posted to clpm nowadays. And no doubt it is
so likely due to the volume(s) of (certain type of questions queried to
clpm)

And, that issue likely also pertains to attempts to maintain a certain
characterization for the purpose of to be kept within the boundaries of
the definition of a certain culture.

Certain behaviors typically exhibit a certain culture.

Yes, we do *need* to "show up". But there's also such a thing as
"reasonable humility".

To show up characterized as too verbose and over bearingly stern, to
the point of being haughty, is a problem. Counteract that with
humbleness gone astray, so much so that self esteem lacks and
passiveness flows. This latter also is a problem.

Both of those problems can represent a range of from one extreme to the
other.

(a range of from one extreme to the other which includes "middle")
I've heard it said that to strike a balance between two opposite polar
forces -- IOW "in the middle" rather than to be at either of the two
extremes.

If the individual who is the hall monitor is also the rule enforcer and
the judgement caller then it does seem that "characteristic of the
culture here" values to adopt a persona of this sort.

Like, just keep pounding the hall monitor mallet/act/persona until
either enforcement happens or the offending party(s) tire and go away
to not come back.

But also, as a third outcome, there appears also to be a certain
percentage of lengthy battles that begin and then ensue.

So, (about culture) I don't understand why more ignoring doesn't happen
so as to replace the stern (attempted) rule enforcement.

Either ask an appropriate question or else get no replies, none.

I'd think that would be less abrasive than fending/wrestling over an
issue of what constitutes appropriate
characterization/behavior/culture.

I hope the Perl community thrives. I do.

I've seen a few places at the www that are broadcasting dissonance
about/toward Perl and com. (admittedly some of them do lack in
coherency as well as lack of/in good arguement practices). I don't
know if this means anything.
--

I've lurked on and off on this clpm ng for upwards of 2 to 2 1/2 years.
I've never asked a question. I've only posted a reply a few times.

But I've asked (and answered) a few questions on several beginner
lists/groups.

I'm near intermediate level as far as my (Perl) skill/expertise level.

But how (or if) to fit within both the guidelines and the culture here
as far as a potential question to be asked . . .

--
Alan.

.