Nature of this list

I remember when Casey West and Kevin Meltzer started this list. Casey=20
was very specific on-line and in person about it being a place where=20
newcomers could ask questions without being flamed. The FAQ bears this=20
out:

: 2.1 - What is the list for?
:
: A list for beginning Perl programmers to ask questions in a friendly
: atmosphere.

That is also the complete description of this group at http://
lists.perl.org/list/beginners.html.

The FAQ goes on:

: 2.3 - Are there any rules?
:
: Yes. As with most communities, there are rules. Not many, and ones that
: shouldn't need to be mentioned, but they are.
:
: * Be nice
: * No flaming
: * Have fun
:[...]
: * If you think what you are writing may be taken in a way you didn't
: intend, please add a smiley :-) Many flame wars are stopped by a simple
: smiley!
: * No flames. If your fingers are burning as you are typing the email, i=
t
: would likely be best not to send it.

If anything is clear from that FAQ it is that the intention is to avoid=20
flames on this list. Casey and Kevin appear to have stopped monitoring=20
this group some time ago, though.

There is no shortage of lists, groups, or forums where people can get=20
flamed for not following the rules, and people who want to flame them=20
have an outlet for doing so. I've already stopped reading most of them=20
because it's not worth my time when most of the content is arguments=20
about conduct. I don't know whether communities inevitably fall into=20
that mode after a while but this one at least had a good run and I'll be=20
sorry if I end up leaving it too. =20

Andy Lester had a good article about this: http://perlbuzz.com/2010/11/
think-for-perls-sake.html. But judging from the responses it seems he=20
and I may be in a minority.

--=20
Peter Scott
http://www.perlmedic.com/ http://www.perldebugged.com/
http://www.informit.com/store/product.aspx?isbn=3D0137001274
http://www.oreillyschool.com/courses/perl3/

--=20
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On Tuesday 19 Apr 2011 18:00:05 Peter Scott wrote:
> I remember when Casey West and Kevin Meltzer started this list. Casey
> was very specific on-line and in person about it being a place where
> newcomers could ask questions without being flamed. The FAQ bears this
>
> out:
> : 2.1 - What is the list for?
> :
> : A list for beginning Perl programmers to ask questions in a friendly
> : atmosphere.
>
> That is also the complete description of this group at http://
> lists.perl.org/list/beginners.html.
>
> The FAQ goes on:
> : 2.3 - Are there any rules?
> :
> : Yes. As with most communities, there are rules. Not many, and ones that
> : shouldn't need to be mentioned, but they are.
> :
> : * Be nice
> : * No flaming
> : * Have fun
> :
> :[...]
> :
> : * If you think what you are writing may be taken in a way you didn't
> : intend, please add a smiley :-) Many flame wars are stopped by a simple
> : smiley!
> : * No flames. If your fingers are burning as you are typing the email, it
> :
> : would likely be best not to send it.
>
> If anything is clear from that FAQ it is that the intention is to avoid
> flames on this list. Casey and Kevin appear to have stopped monitoring
> this group some time ago, though.
>
> There is no shortage of lists, groups, or forums where people can get
> flamed for not following the rules, and people who want to flame them
> have an outlet for doing so. I've already stopped reading most of them
> because it's not worth my time when most of the content is arguments
> about conduct. I don't know whether communities inevitably fall into
> that mode after a while but this one at least had a good run and I'll be
> sorry if I end up leaving it too.
>
> Andy Lester had a good article about this: http://perlbuzz.com/2010/11/
> think-for-perls-sake.html. But judging from the responses it seems he
> and I may be in a minority.

Just for the record, here is the full and non-broken URL:

http://perlbuzz.com/2010/11/think-for-perls-sake.html

Other links of interest are my own (and related links):

* http://www.shlomifish.org/philosophy/perl-newcomers/

* http://shlomif-tech.livejournal.com/34831.html

Regards,

Shlomi Fish

--
------------------------------------------------------------ -----
Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/
"The Human Hacking Field Guide" - http://shlom.in/hhfg

Chuck Norris once wrote a 10 million lines C++ program in Microsoft Notepad
without having to use the backspace key. And it compiled without errors or
warnings, and was 100% bug-free.

Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On 19/04/2011 16:00, Peter Scott wrote:
>
> I remember when Casey West and Kevin Meltzer started this list. Casey
> was very specific on-line and in person about it being a place where
> newcomers could ask questions without being flamed. The FAQ bears this
> out:
>
> : 2.1 - What is the list for?
> :
> : A list for beginning Perl programmers to ask questions in a friendly
> : atmosphere.
>
> That is also the complete description of this group at http://
> lists.perl.org/list/beginners.html.
>
> The FAQ goes on:
>
> : 2.3 - Are there any rules?
> :
> : Yes. As with most communities, there are rules. Not many, and ones that
> : shouldn't need to be mentioned, but they are.
> :
> : * Be nice
> : * No flaming
> : * Have fun
> :[...]
> : * If you think what you are writing may be taken in a way you didn't
> : intend, please add a smiley :-) Many flame wars are stopped by a simple
> : smiley!
> : * No flames. If your fingers are burning as you are typing the email, it
> : would likely be best not to send it.
>
> If anything is clear from that FAQ it is that the intention is to avoid
> flames on this list. Casey and Kevin appear to have stopped monitoring
> this group some time ago, though.

I have raised the issue of bullying with the moderators in past years.
The reaction was that, since Randal had such valuable input, it was
appropriate to let it drop. I find Randal's ideas interesting, although
hardly germane or unmissable, but the decision has let through the flood
of bad manners for so long that it is now entrenched in the life of the
list. That is a damned shame, and I think the moderators should earn
their position and make some changes at last.

Rob

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 01:17, Rob Dixon wrote:
> On 19/04/2011 16:00, Peter Scott wrote:
>> If anything is clear from that FAQ it is that the intention is to avoid
>> flames on this list.  Casey and Kevin appear to have stopped monito=
ring
>> this group some time ago, though.
> I have raised the issue of bullying with the moderators in past years.
> The reaction was that, since Randal had such valuable input, it was
> appropriate to let it drop. I find Randal's ideas interesting, although
> hardly germane or unmissable, but the decision has let through the flood
> of bad manners for so long that it is now entrenched in the life of the
> list. That is a damned shame, and I think the moderators should earn
> their position and make some changes at last.


I doubt my name registers to many here :-) but for a brief period, I
was following this list. But now, I've basically left for the reasons
both of you are raising. I haven't heard it called it as "bullying",
but sounds correct.

I thought the list was a good way to get help and then to help others
in return. But despite the interactive nature, a book seems to be
better since it never shouts at you. For those of us who first
learned programming from a teacher, I'm glad that when I didn't
initialize my variables, left out comments, or didn't enable a warning
for the compiler, I didn't get shouted at. If that was how things
started, I'm not so sure I'd still be doing this...

Good to see there are many good people on the list. But when the
stress gets high, there are probably other ways to help Perl beginners
(web sites like stackoverflow, writing a good blog/web page, or
helping someone physically sitting next to you). It ain't worth
getting stressed over. After all, this mailing list is a very small
part of the whole Perl community...thankfully! :-)

Ray

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

>>>>> "Rob" == Rob Dixon writes:

Rob> I have raised the issue of bullying with the moderators in past years.
Rob> The reaction was that, since Randal had such valuable input, it was
Rob> appropriate to let it drop. I find Randal's ideas interesting, although
Rob> hardly germane or unmissable, but the decision has let through the flood
Rob> of bad manners for so long that it is now entrenched in the life of the
Rob> list. That is a damned shame, and I think the moderators should earn
Rob> their position and make some changes at last.

Since you mentioned me by name...

My biggest problem (I think) is that I'm clearly not my code. If
someone complains about my code, no matter how harshly, *I* don't take
it as an affront to *me*. I just learn from it, and get better.

So, I project that same level of independence on others, and have a
really hard time relating that someone would take a criticism of code as
a personal attack.

I suspect that most *mature* programmers have already sorted this out,
even if they are beginners in Perl. And since most people who came to
Perl in the early days were already mature programmers, my style got
locked in.

This list was created in response to the resulting "old culture vs new
culture" flame wars that made CLPM and monks "unsafe for new
programmers". Not "new to Perl", but "new to programming", and since
more people are learning Perl as a first or second language, the scales
are tipping.

Rob, sadly, you're right. I agree. This list has become more and more
like every other list.

Maybe this proves that it's inevitable. Not that it makes it right, but
just an observation.

There's some interesting discussion up and down the thread of
http://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=205373 where I brought this up with
respect to monks.

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095

Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On 11-04-19 04:31 PM, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> So, I project that same level of independence on others, and have a
> really hard time relating that someone would take a criticism of code as
> a personal attack.

Some people are intimidated by the smallest of criticism. It usually
can be traced back to a math or science teacher they hate. The way to
overcome this is to use gentle persuasion.


--
Just my 0.00000002 million dollars worth,
Shawn

Confusion is the first step of understanding.

Programming is as much about organization and communication
as it is about coding.

The secret to great software: Fail early & often.

Eliminate software piracy: use only FLOSS.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On 19/04/2011 21:31, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> "Rob" == Rob Dixon writes:
>
> Rob> I have raised the issue of bullying with the moderators in past years.
> Rob> The reaction was that, since Randal had such valuable input, it was
> Rob> appropriate to let it drop. I find Randal's ideas interesting, although
> Rob> hardly germane or unmissable, but the decision has let through the flood
> Rob> of bad manners for so long that it is now entrenched in the life of the
> Rob> list. That is a damned shame, and I think the moderators should earn
> Rob> their position and make some changes at last.
>
> Since you mentioned me by name...
>
> My biggest problem (I think) is that I'm clearly not my code. If
> someone complains about my code, no matter how harshly, *I* don't take
> it as an affront to *me*. I just learn from it, and get better.

Really? So I could ridicule your code, your religion, your children,
your omelettes, your business, or your fitness regime, and you wouldn't
feel a twinge unless I attacked the essential essence that is Randal?

I am not sure I could always tell the difference between myself and my
functions. Indeed, in my world the things you do and say that impact me
define whom you are. What you wrote on this list left with me with the
impression that you were unhappy and spiteful.

I have no doubt of your technical abilities, but the tone of your older
posts here differ hugely from that of your books. If they were written
with the same vehemence I am sure it would hit your pocket hard.

Rob

(wondering whom or what *Randal Schwartz* may be . . . )

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

>>>>> "Rob" == Rob Dixon writes:

Rob> Really? So I could ridicule your code, your religion, your children,
Rob> your omelettes, your business, or your fitness regime, and you wouldn't
Rob> feel a twinge unless I attacked the essential essence that is
Rob> Randal?

Ideally, no. Now, do I have some issues sometimes? Sure. :)

Rob> I have no doubt of your technical abilities, but the tone of your older
Rob> posts here differ hugely from that of your books. If they were written
Rob> with the same vehemence I am sure it would hit your pocket hard.

Keep in mind that I'm creating new code in the books and columns, not
reacting to bad code.

Here (and on monks and usenet and now StackOverflow), I'm (often)
reacting to bad code. And I make no apologies for saying code is bad or
wrong or illpurposed or a security threat, if that's indeed what it is,
and I also believe that the person who creates such code needs to
understand that in *no* uncertain terms. Softening the blow does nobody
any good there. Weaselwording is counterproductive.

If they don't have a thick skin already, they'd better get one soon, or
they'll be useless as an advanced programmer. Without thick skin, they
won't be able to submit their code for review regardless of how much
their ego is invested in it. And down that path lies security breaches
and thedailywtf.com submissions. I have no tolerance for that. I'm
trying to make the world a better place, one correction at a time. :)

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095

Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On 11-04-19 06:25 PM, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> If they don't have a thick skin already, they'd better get one soon, or
> they'll be useless as an advanced programmer.

That's the stupidest thing I ever heard.

PS: If you don't like my comment, grow a thick skin!


--
Just my 0.00000002 million dollars worth,
Shawn

Confusion is the first step of understanding.

Programming is as much about organization and communication
as it is about coding.

The secret to great software: Fail early & often.

Eliminate software piracy: use only FLOSS.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

>>>>> "Shawn" == Shawn H Corey writes:

Shawn> PS: If you don't like my comment, grow a thick skin!

No offense taken. It says a lot more about you than it does about me.

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095

Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On 2011-04-19 18:01:38 -0400, Rob Dixon said:
>=20
> Really? So I could ridicule your code, your religion, your children,
> your omelettes, your business, or your fitness regime, and you wouldn't
> feel a twinge unless I attacked the essential essence that is Randal?

Criticizing a man's omelettes is going too far!!! Dem's fighting words! =
:)

--=20
Robert



--=20
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

>>>>> "Robert" == Robert writes:

Robert> Criticizing a man's omelettes is going too far!!! Dem's fighting
Robert> words! :)

Egg-cellent point!

:-)

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095

Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

Speaking as someone who uses Perl for work, but is also an academic
specializing in Chaucerian studies, and who divorced a man for his
belief that his flaws were his flaws and that's just who he is and the
whole world should just get over themselves:

There is a lot to be said for delivery. You don't have to tell me that
anything I have produced is "a good attempt" or in any other way
mollycoddle me, as I am an adult. Nothing will be learned if we all
require pussy-footed feedback.

On the other hand, simply calling something bad, stupid or useless is
also not going to contribute to anyone's betterment. Say that something
is too verbose, and we will know that there is too much of it; say that
something is convoluted and we will know that it is poorly organized;
Say that something is lacking in checks and balances, and we will know
that we need to add more logic to both our process and our program; say
that something is insecure, and we will know to taint the bajeezus out
of it. Give the brick you lob initially some real meaning and it can
then guide our subsequent questions.

If you must, and you don't mind being pigeon-holed with a bunch of other
programmers into the
how-sad-he-must-have-asspergers-I-wonder-if-he-has-friends category, go
ahead and lace any meaningful criticism you might be kind enough to
offer with mean(ingless) modifiers like "bad" or "stupid". We will turn
the other cheek, but also perhaps look the other way when we are having
a day bad enough (or have internal issues delicate enough) that putting
up with someone else's lack of people skills isn't worth the edification.

Saying, however, that other people should cheerfully accept general,
non-edifying asshattery, or rudeness that most adults - regardless of
people-skill-level - can identify as such, simply because that is Who
You(pl.) Are is as pointless as the rest of us not seeking help with our
code. People and code are, at their best, both works in progress, no?
The very fact that people volunteer their time on this list is
honorable. Certainly, no volunteer would tell us not to attempt to
better our code if there were call for it. I consider the occasional
visit from the manners patrol as a worthy attempt by the group to get
people to do the same with their own selves.

I thank everyone on this list who has taught me something, but I must
say that on this list I often wait for the stream to bring me answers I
can use, rather than asking questions myself unless the situation or
time constraints are dire.

Bless.

Kristin Nielsen
Web Developer
San Diego Zoo


On 4/19/11 3:33 PM, Shawn H Corey wrote:
> On 11-04-19 06:25 PM, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>> If they don't have a thick skin already, they'd better get one soon, or
>> they'll be useless as an advanced programmer.
>
> That's the stupidest thing I ever heard.
>
> PS: If you don't like my comment, grow a thick skin!
>
>

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On 04/19/2011 08:00 AM, Peter Scott wrote:
> I remember when Casey West and Kevin Meltzer started this list. Casey
> was very specific on-line and in person about it being a place where
> newcomers could ask questions without being flamed. The FAQ bears this
> out:
....
> this one at least had a good run and I'll be sorry if I end up leaving it too.

It's a shame when people leave a community because they feel it has
taken on a negative tone.


The first question that comes to mind is "what is the process for
dealing with negative behavior on this mailing list?".


Looking at:

http://learn.perl.org/faq/beginners.html

I see:

1.8 - Who owns this list? Who do I complain to?

Casey West owns the beginners list. You can contact him at
casey@geeknest.com.

...

1.10 - Who will maintain peace and flow on the list?

Casey West, Kevin Meltzer and Ask Bjoern Hansen currently carry
large, yet padded, clue-sticks to maintain peace and order on the list.
If you are privately emailed by one of these folks for flaming, being
off-topic, etc... please listen to what they say. If you see a message
sent to the list by one of these people saying that a thread is closed,
do not continue to post to the list on that thread! If you do, you will
not only meet face to face with a XQJ-37 nuclear powered pansexual
roto-plooker, but you may also be taken off of the list. These people
simply want to make sure the list stays topical, and above-all, useful
to Perl beginners.


And, I also see:

1.11 - When was this FAQ last updated?

November 20, 2001


So, my next question is "has the complaint resolution process broken down?".


David

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>
> If they don't have a thick skin already, they'd better get one soon, or
> they'll be useless as an advanced programmer. Without thick skin, they
> won't be able to submit their code for review regardless of how much
> their ego is invested in it.
>
>
I've been following this list for a few months now, and I've posted a
handful of times (both for questions and possible solutions). The first
time I ventured some guesses in unknown territory, I got struck down
pretty fast. It does kind of suck to spend some time thinking about how
things work, post an idea, and then read a "you're completely
wrong"-style, blunt reply.

I can see how some newbies could get scared away by this atmosphere, and
indeed I have thought twice before posting questions or replying too
quickly. But, I have accepted it almost like a "Perl initiation"
trial. I figure, if I stick with it long enough, I can be helped past
the "newbie level" of Perl understanding.

Indeed, this list has been an amazing resource for me. Since I'm
learning Perl on my own, this list is like a virtual classroom. I enjoy
seeing variations on a theme (good and bad), even after a question has
been answered, because it gives me insight on how to think about these
problems in different ways. If I have to thicken my skin a bit to
accept criticism of my code, it's worth it for the knowledge and
understanding gained.

As a side note, I must confess a slight sense of awe (and much
appreciation), that the authors of modules I've used, and even author of
two BOOKS I am learning from, are willing to take any amount of time to
answer our beginner questions. When I first decided to tackle Perl, I
did not expect to have such "live" expert advice readily available.

Since this is a community effort, and the experts aren't getting
monetarily compensated for their contributions here, I can understand
the tendency toward blunt responses. But it is commendable that some
contributors (Shlomi, et.al.) are trying to make the community a little
more friendly to newcomers.

To be perfectly honest, I'm glad that both camps exist here. It helps
in my Perl education, but also prepares me for the "real world". I'd
much rather have my code ripped apart here on this list, rather than
later when it is my entry-level IT job on the line during a code
review. I may as well be humbled early on!

On the flip side, for the "hobbyist" programmer, without some
hand-holding, they might bail and switch to an "easier" (or more trendy)
language to learn (I don't dare give names ;-)

I guess this community has to decide if it wants the list to cater to
beginning IT professionals, amateur programming hobbyists, or both.
From my newbie perspective, I think this list does a pretty good job
with both overall. Even in the context of the current debate, I feel
the viewpoints people have contributed to the list are all insightful,
and not excessively negative in tone. Shall we all say "bygones" and
move on? ;-)

Brian


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:33 PM, Brian F. Yulga
wrote:
> The first time I ventured some guesses in unknown territory, I
> got struck down pretty fast.  It does kind of suck to spend
> some time thinking about how things work, post an idea, and
> then read a "you're completely wrong"-style, blunt reply.

This stinging feeling is constructive. We have a tendency to be
proud of what we've done and sometimes that can cloud our ability
to learn. It can be helpful to be told outright that you're
wrong. It stings (nobody wants to be wrong; especially publicly),
but hopefully you learn from it (and hopefully it doesn't stick
to you ;)).

> I can see how some newbies could get scared away by this
> atmosphere, and indeed I have thought twice before posting
> questions or replying too quickly.  But, I have accepted it
> almost like a "Perl initiation" trial.  I figure, if I stick
> with it long enough, I can be helped past the "newbie level" of
> Perl understanding.

Thinking twice before posting can also be constructive, albeit, I
think sometimes it can be a hindrance too. If people are too
afraid to speak up then they'll never get the chance to be
corrected.

Even long time members get regularly berated on this list, so I
don't think it's accurate to consider it an initiation ritual.
It's there to stay. To me it also feels like certain members run
the show and everybody has to do things their way, whether
there's sense in it or not. I've seen posters get ripped a new
one for posting code with formatting preferences that differ from
others'. It's one thing to express a difference of opinion, but I
think that if it's open to debate then you should try to be
friendly about it. TMTOWTDI. :-X

I've seen Uri Guttman (I hope I spelled his name correctly!)
defend his sometimes harsh (albeit, often justified) criticisms
with his job placement work, but I have seen him be extremely
hard on semantics just because they're his personal preference,
and word it so harshly that it's as if anybody choosing something
different doesn't deserve a right to their own opinion.

That's about the only elitism that I take offense to on this
list. It's good to encourage good practices and discourage bad
practices, but it's bad to be closed-minded about it. It's much
better to explain why something is bad than to berate somebody
for using bad practices. There's no reason for anybody to just
take your word for it. It should be expected that you should
explain why something is right or wrong or just not bother
chiming in. :)

While I don't necessarily agree that the original remark that
started this ball rolling was overly rude, I do think that Uri
has a harsh reputation and since we're communicating in text and
we all know that text doesn't always convey our intentions
accurately, innocent and constructive messages can sometimes be
interpretted badly. It's therefore best to try to be friendly
whenever possible to avoid getting a reputation for being nasty.
There's less chance of being misunderstood that way. Using
smileys can help as well. A smile can certainly help to show
genuinely good intentions as opposed to harsh ones. It's a bit
like always ending a Perl statement with a semi-colon, even if
it's not actually required. Just to make sure the code is
interpreted as you intend. :)

I don't think compliments are necessary (as Shlomi Fish, IIRC,
suggested earlier). Just be friendly about it. It isn't a pissing
contest; it's about improving the code quality. :)

I think Shlomi Fish does a pretty good job of explaining why
something is wrong (or more often, linking to a specific FAQ that
does), though sometimes I wonder if he's a bit too picky (mostly
just with identifiers). ;) He's usually very polite about it, at
least.

> I enjoy seeing variations on a theme (good and bad), even after
> a question has been answered, because it gives me insight on
> how to think about these problems in different ways.

Exactly. It's beneficial for people to feel welcomed to say the
wrong thing without fearing ridicule. That's how you learn. You
make mistakes. Criticize code; not coders (unless they should
already know better; in which case rip away). :)

> To be perfectly honest, I'm glad that both camps exist here.
> It helps in my Perl education, but also prepares me for the
>"real world".

In the real world, people are more polite because there are
consequences for their actions. There are still people in
positions of power that choose to exploit it, but then there are
also people that bring guns to work. :-X

> On the flip side, for the "hobbyist" programmer, without some
> hand-holding, they might bail and switch to an "easier" (or
> more trendy) language to learn (I don't dare give names ;-)

I don't think it should be about recruiting new people. It isn't
a popularity contest. It should just be about helping each other
out where possible. That is, if you think that you have something
constructive to say then say it. If you're only trying to push
your might around then at least pick on somebody your own size.
:D

All that said, there is no one regular poster that I think is
more destructive than constructive, but I think that there are
times when certain people do more harm than good.




-- Brandon McCaig
V zrna gur orfg jvgu jung V fnl. Vg qbrfa'g nyjnlf fbhaq gung
jnl. Castopulence Software


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On Apr 19, 2011, at 11:17 AM, Rob Dixon wrote:

> On 19/04/2011 16:00, Peter Scott wrote:
>>=20
>> If anything is clear from that FAQ it is that the intention is to =
avoid
>> flames on this list. Casey and Kevin appear to have stopped =
monitoring
>> this group some time ago, though.
>=20
> I have raised the issue of bullying with the moderators in past years.
> The reaction was that, since Randal had such valuable input, it was
> appropriate to let it drop. [...] the decision has let through the =
flood
> of bad manners for so long that it is now entrenched in the life of =
the
> list.=20

That's useful information to have, and I'll adjust my own expectations =
accordingly. =20

Lest it get lost in the noise: the majority of contributors to this list =
appear to just "get it" when it comes to common courtesy. They don't =
seem to need to have it defined or mandated. I, for one, really =
appreciate that.

I think that the FAQ should be updated, though: first, strike "in a =
friendly atmosphere" from item 2.1. That's just meaningless ad copy if =
there's no one moderating. =20

Then, add something to the effect that part of the purpose of the list =
is to acquaint beginners with the culture of advanced, professional =
programming; as such, they should not be surprised or offended if they =
feel as if they're being treated "harshly" at times for their mistakes; =
that it's simply for their own good -- "like being slapped away from a =
hot stove" as it has been compared to. This is how it is. Growing a =
thick skin is a necessity if you want to survive in the world of Pro =
programming, where there won't necessarily be anyone to comfort or =
protect you - and if you can't live with that, you may not feel safe =
using this list and may, in fact, wish to rethink your career =
aspirations.

Based on some of what I've read, that would be a truer depiction of the =
intent of the list, wouldn't it? Rudeness, curtness, callowness, =
harshness, truthiness . . . call it what you want, but it is currently =
acceptable on the list, so we shouldn't claim "friendliness" in the FAQ. =
Be upfront about setting expectations.=20

For what it's worth: I occasionally tutor medical professionals and =
linguists who are in Vanderbilt grad school studying bioinformatics, in =
intro Computer Programming (C++ and Java thus far, but Perl soon, I =
expect, for obvious reasons). They are NOT going to be professional =
software engineers; nor are they hobbyists. I had thought that I would =
encourage them to learn to use beginners@perl, but since my reputation =
as a tutor is based on the fact that I'm patient and gentle (my students =
are mostly women), I'm less inclined to steer them in this particular =
direction, at least without fair warning. =20

Chap



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 11:38 PM, Chap Harrison
wrote:
> Then, add something to the effect that part of the purpose of
> the list is to acquaint beginners with the culture of advanced,
> professional programming;

Is that the purpose of this list? It's a beginner's list. I would
expect the purpose to be to help absolute beginners out. The
analogy that comes to mind involves skiing. When you take
beginner skiing lessons they don't teach you advanced techniques.
In fact, in my experience, they teach you wrong, albeit simpler,
techniques in the beginning to get you comfortable. As you
advance in your learning process you are eventually taught better
ways of doing things when it becomes appropriate. I think this
holds true in most aspects of life. I see no reason to assume
that somebody taking beginners skiing lessons (or participating
on a beginners list for Perl) necessarily has aspirations or
intentions of becoming a professional.


--
Brandon McCaig
V zrna gur orfg jvgu jung V fnl. Vg qbrfa'g nyjnlf fbhaq gung jnl.
Castopulence Software

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On Apr 19, 2011, at 10:54 PM, Brandon McCaig wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 11:38 PM, Chap Harrison
> wrote:
>> Then, add something to the effect that part of the purpose of
>> the list is to acquaint beginners with the culture of advanced,
>> professional programming;
>
> Is that the purpose of this list? It's a beginner's list.

That's what I understand Randal Schwartz to be saying earlier in this thread:

On 11-04-19 06:25 PM, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> Here (and on monks and usenet and now StackOverflow), I'm (often)
> reacting to bad code. And I make no apologies for saying code is bad or
> wrong or illpurposed or a security threat, if that's indeed what it is,
> and I also believe that the person who creates such code needs to
> understand that in *no* uncertain terms. Softening the blow does nobody
> any good there. Weaselwording is counterproductive.
>
> If they don't have a thick skin already, they'd better get one soon, or
> they'll be useless as an advanced programmer. Without thick skin, they
> won't be able to submit their code for review regardless of how much
> their ego is invested in it. And down that path lies security breaches
> and thedailywtf.com submissions. I have no tolerance for that. I'm
> trying to make the world a better place, one correction at a time. :)
>

Chap

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

so, i haven't seen much 'perl' discussion on this list today. and i
was hoping that this thread has gone on long enough that it might make
some think twice before being rude, spiteful, whatever. i'm pretty
sure that we're all adults and that none of us will change. those that
want to post will do so and take whatever advise along with any wrath
the list wishes to throw at them.

fwiw, imho, ymmv, and other commentary (and lets get back to having
'nice' discussions about perl *code*):

someone along this thread stated that perlmonks was a less friendly
place to post - i actually find the opposite. given the proper
precursory research (which should be done before asking in any form) i
have gotten decent discussion and good answers to quite a few
questions.

i have also found irc to be an excellent place to get real good, quick
answers. the forum generally doesn't allow for as much depth as this
list or monks, but the results are great. that said, the same issues
apply to most technical irc channels as do apply here - people are
quick to anger. i can also jump into topic specific channels and not
need to flood my email with chatter about something i might only use
once or be quickly told that 'this isn't the tool for the job'.

also, the main reason i thought uri's comment uncalled for was because
i might have posted that same response that he was attacking. no, not
the eval stuff, but something else in response to a question. maybe i
see answers and wonder if my way of thinking is as good or better than
what has already been said? should i start a new thread every time i
want to check my idea against what has already been said?

one way or the other, my opinion stands - we get paid as well as we do
not because we can do things that few can, we get paid to handle and
deal out as much bullshit as is humanly possible. this means that if
someone scares someone new to this field off, they might not make it
in computers - from being an admin and having a user tell me 'you
can't fix that printer, i smashed it into the desk so you'd get me a
new one' to developing and having a boss that came up with a new way
to do something every time his balls itched. though, at then end, i do
*try* to remember to be human (the next day) after someone pisses me
off.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On 19 April 2011 16:00, Peter Scott wrote:
....
> :[...]
> : * If you think what you are writing may be taken in a way you didn't
> : intend, please add a smiley :-) Many flame wars are stopped by a simple
> : smiley!
> : * No flames. If your fingers are burning as you are typing the email, i=
t
> : =A0would likely be best not to send it.
>
> If anything is clear from that FAQ it is that the intention is to avoid
> flames on this list. =A0Casey and Kevin appear to have stopped monitoring
> this group some time ago, though.
>
> There is no shortage of lists, groups, or forums where people can get
> flamed for not following the rules, and people who want to flame them
> have an outlet for doing so. =A0I've already stopped reading most of them
> because it's not worth my time when most of the content is arguments
> about conduct. =A0I don't know whether communities inevitably fall into
> that mode after a while but this one at least had a good run and I'll be
> sorry if I end up leaving it too.
>
> Andy Lester had a good article about this: http://perlbuzz.com/2010/11/
> think-for-perls-sake.html. =A0But judging from the responses it seems he
> and I may be in a minority.


Is it time for our annual "Be nice" thread? I didn't realise a year
had passed so soon. I missed what triggered this one. Can someone post
a link to the thread please ( I did ask nicely ).
Dp.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On 11-04-20 02:31 AM, shawn wilson wrote:
> given the proper
> precursory research

Part of the problem is that beginners may not know that perldoc even
exists, yet alone, know that "Quote and Quote-like Operators" is found
in perlop.

The search function for perldoc are very crude and
http://perldoc.perl.org/ is not much better.


--
Just my 0.00000002 million dollars worth,
Shawn

Confusion is the first step of understanding.

Programming is as much about organization and communication
as it is about coding.

The secret to great software: Fail early & often.

Eliminate software piracy: use only FLOSS.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On Apr 19, 6:25=A0pm, mer...@stonehenge.com ((Randal L. Schwartz))
wrote:

> Here (and on monks and usenet and now StackOverflow), I'm (often)
> reacting to bad code. =A0And I make no apologies for saying code is bad o=
r
> wrong or illpurposed or a security threat, if that's indeed what it is,
> and I also believe that the person who creates such code needs to
> understand that in *no* uncertain terms. =A0Softening the blow does nobod=
y
> any good there. =A0Weaselwording is counterproductive.
>
> If they don't have a thick skin already, they'd better get one soon, or
> they'll be useless as an advanced programmer. =A0Without thick skin, they
> won't be able to submit their code for review regardless of how much
> their ego is invested in it. =A0And down that path lies security breaches
> and thedailywtf.com submissions. =A0I have no tolerance for that. =A0I'm
> trying to make the world a better place, one correction at a time. :)

How did we jump from beginner to advanced programmer? Is it ok if we
get
pass through the intermediate stage first? :-)

I don't think people should be coddled either but as I mentioned in
another conversation about this thread: A Judo instructor doesn't grab
a
new student by the arm and throw them across the room on the first day
without teaching them how to fall. In Judo, learning to fall is it's
own
art and takes a while during which you get plenty of bruises.
Potentially placing someone in a body cast on the first day, week or
month does nothing to teach them the mastery of Judo. It may just
teach
them to master the art of running away. :-)

While some may think that's a good thing as it 'helps' people find
something their better suited for, I don't agree. I think you need to
have a place where you can fail =97 where your code can suck =97 and
understand why without a trial by fire. There is plenty of time to get
your work ripped apart and be pressured to fix it in a withering time
frame. This is (IMHO) not that place. There are plenty of other
forums/lists to get that kind of =97 'training' =97 but the people like me
that come here are a long way from being called advanced.

Luis


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On Tue, April 19, 2011 12:45 pm, Raymond Wan wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 01:17, Rob Dixon wrote:
>> On 19/04/2011 16:00, Peter Scott wrote:
>>> If anything is clear from that FAQ it is that the intention is to avo=
id
>>> flames on this list.  Casey and Kevin appear to have stopped
>>> monitoring
>>> this group some time ago, though.
>> I have raised the issue of bullying with the moderators in past years.
>> The reaction was that, since Randal had such valuable input, it was
>> appropriate to let it drop. I find Randal's ideas interesting, althoug=
h
>> hardly germane or unmissable, but the decision has let through the flo=
od
>> of bad manners for so long that it is now entrenched in the life of th=
e
>> list. That is a damned shame, and I think the moderators should earn
>> their position and make some changes at last.
>
>
> I doubt my name registers to many here :-) but for a brief period, I
> was following this list. But now, I've basically left for the reasons
> both of you are raising. I haven't heard it called it as "bullying",
> but sounds correct.
>
> I thought the list was a good way to get help and then to help others
> in return. But despite the interactive nature, a book seems to be
> better since it never shouts at you. For those of us who first
> learned programming from a teacher, I'm glad that when I didn't
> initialize my variables, left out comments, or didn't enable a warning
> for the compiler, I didn't get shouted at. If that was how things
> started, I'm not so sure I'd still be doing this...
>
> Good to see there are many good people on the list. But when the
> stress gets high, there are probably other ways to help Perl beginners
> (web sites like stackoverflow, writing a good blog/web page, or
> helping someone physically sitting next to you). It ain't worth
> getting stressed over. After all, this mailing list is a very small
> part of the whole Perl community...thankfully! :-)
>
> Ray

No matter on a list or in real life. There are always that one person
here and there that get a charge out of sucking the life out of others
with their negativity and criticism. Just have to ignore those types, or
you just get sucked into their black hole of nothing-less. In other
words, just ignore and move on. I've had some in here question if I know
anything about the code I wrote, as if saying they couldn't understand
anything I wrote. But hey, I'm a busy admin, and I don't have time to
message and cuddle a script for days... I get it to work, and move on to
the next. Sure, I've learned plenty in here give me constructive
criticism and believe I've learned how to put plenty of checks, etc in my
code to avoid disaster. So in short, this list is awesome!


--=20
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On 19/04/2011 23:25, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>
> Here (and on monks and usenet and now StackOverflow), I'm (often)
> reacting to bad code. And I make no apologies for saying code is bad
> or wrong or illpurposed or a security threat, if that's indeed what
> it is, and I also believe that the person who creates such code needs
> to understand that in *no* uncertain terms. Softening the blow does
> nobody any good there.

There we agree.

> Weaselwording is counterproductive.

You appear to have changed topic? The empty words most often come from
those who would impress their superiority on the rest of us. But I still
agree.

> If they don't have a thick skin already, they'd better get one soon,
> or they'll be useless as an advanced programmer. Without thick skin,
> they won't be able to submit their code for review regardless of how
> much their ego is invested in it. And down that path lies security
> breaches and thedailywtf.com submissions. I have no tolerance for
> that. I'm trying to make the world a better place, one correction at
> a time. :)

My problem is that the thugs on this group see it as their right and
privilege to put other posters through the grimness of life as well as
to inform on Perl. Think about it - that is laughable.

It is certainly the way to American success to appear to have an
unattainable skill, but is is certainly not the way to wellbeing and
progress for people in general. As I mentioned in a previous post, you
have softened recently. So it is likely that your life has improved and
you are better provided for, and no longer have the need to abuse. I am
very happy for you, and for the rest of the world who would read this list.

As for the others who can see no problem in their nastiness, and indeed
who find an excuse that it is their job to prepare the list members for
life, please concentrate on preparing yourselves for life. We have other
resources if we are struggling, but we come to this list to learn about
Perl.

Rob

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On 19/04/2011 22:10, Shawn H Corey wrote:
>
> Some people are intimidated by the smallest of criticism. It usually
> can be traced back to a math or science teacher they hate. The way to
> overcome this is to use gentle persuasion.

Erm, Shawn, please don't tell us about the science teacher that you
hated. I am sorry for you, but there are better places to regain your
confidence. Talk to your friends, and remember that not every problem is
a finite state machine.

Good luck.

Rob


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

>>>>> "Rob" == Rob Dixon writes:

Rob> As I mentioned in a previous post, you have softened recently. So
Rob> it is likely that your life has improved and you are better
Rob> provided for, and no longer have the need to abuse. I am very happy
Rob> for you, and for the rest of the world who would read this list.

To discredit this post, as well as your other claims, I'm actually going
through the worst period in my life, exceeding my criminal arrest and
conviction in 1995, which I had hoped would be the "forever lowest
times". These past 18 months put that as a mere bump. If you've
followed my blogs and tweets, you'd know the main details.

Please leave your armchair psychology at home.

You may not like that I don't pull punches with others, probably because
you're unwilling to be that direct. You'd rather be liked than to have
an effect on others. I'm not that. I don't care if people like me, if
what I do will eventually change behavior for others. I'm about the
world, not about me. I want to leave this world a better place.

People come online to learn Perl. If they write code that sucks, that's
not the way Perl should be coded. I'll let them know straight out.
There's too much bad Perl being coded out there. I know... clients hire
me to sort through the muck, and pay me a decent wage to do that. So if
anything, I'm being counterproductive, because my goal is that I become
no longer needed. :)

If someone comes here looking for a compliment for bad code simply
because they've made an attempt, they're confused about what it takes to
become a programmer.

In classroom labs, I use a much more Socratic method, because I have the
privilege of multiple interactions. When asked a question, I generally
respond with "well, how is that part of it going to work?" or "what did
I say about X yesterday?", and get to repeat that until the correct
observation is mad. But that requires far more interaction than a
mailing list can provide. I generally only get one shot here to fix the
problem, so I go straight for the fix. And *that's* how I'm different in
a live situation, and get hired and rehired to teach.

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095

Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On 21/04/2011 17:25, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>>>>>> "Rob" == Rob Dixon writes:
>
> Rob> As I mentioned in a previous post, you have softened recently.
> So Rob> it is likely that your life has improved and you are better
> Rob> provided for, and no longer have the need to abuse. I am very
> happy Rob> for you, and for the rest of the world who would read
> this list.
>
> To discredit this post, as well as your other claims, I'm actually
> going through the worst period in my life, exceeding my criminal
> arrest and conviction in 1995, which I had hoped would be the
> "forever lowest times". These past 18 months put that as a mere
> bump. If you've followed my blogs and tweets, you'd know the main
> details.
>
> Please leave your armchair psychology at home.

I sincerely hoped you had come on better times, and it is upsetting to
know that I can still not trust you to behave well. I will not research
you: if you wish us to know you situation then please retell it here.

> You may not like that I don't pull punches with others, probably
> because you're unwilling to be that direct. You'd rather be liked
> than to have an effect on others. I'm not that. I don't care if
> people like me, if what I do will eventually change behavior for
> others. I'm about the world, not about me. I want to leave this
> world a better place.

On the contrary, I believe you are better able to say things that need
saying than I am. My complaint is very different: that you used to find
all fault possible and magnify it to no one's benefit.

> People come online to learn Perl.

Yes! But you have succumbed to Germanic syntax where asentence needsonly
spaces tomakesense. It is 'on line'.

> If they write code that sucks, that's not the way Perl should be
> coded. I'll let them know straight out.

Yes, but you seem unable to keep to the defence that is widely
published, that you criticize not the man but the code. You used to
assassinate characters all the time while claiming otherwise.

> There's too much bad Perl being coded out there. I know... clients
> hire me to sort through the muck, and pay me a decent wage to do
> that. So if anything, I'm being counterproductive, because my goal
> is that I become no longer needed. :)

Randal, I have the same problem with all products. Let's say greetings
cards. Why on earth do stores sell such distasteful stuff? There seems
no reason why it shouldn't all be good, or at least acceptable. But I
know that, if I was to complain, there would always be average and poor
examples of the art. Be real and allow people who are as learned as you
once were.

Your profession is an art. You are gifted with the ability to write
software well, and it is unusual. Don't expect the rest of the world to
be as able.

> If someone comes here looking for a compliment for bad code simply
> because they've made an attempt, they're confused about what it
> takes to become a programmer.

People come here looking for help, knowing that what thay have achieved
so far is wrong somehow - at least it doesn't work and they don't know
what to do next. The last thing they need is for Randal to come over all
clever on them, make them out as idiots and imply that they should have
been coding from birth.

> In classroom labs, I use a much more Socratic method, because I have
> the privilege of multiple interactions. When asked a question, I
> generally respond with "well, how is that part of it going to work?"
> or "what did I say about X yesterday?", and get to repeat that until
> the correct observation is [made]. But that requires far more
> interaction than a mailing list can provide.

I can see that in the irony of the way you post. What happens when the
Socratic method has destroyed all hypotheses?

I believe that we need new ideas, and anything should be considered
until it must be pegged as impossible. That means we should express our
misgivings at every step, but know that we may be wrong in our
anticipation of failure.

Software is a mathematics that is about expressing function. So far it
is tied both to the humanistics that allows us to /understand/ what we
have written, and the electronics that /implements/ what we have written.

> I generally only get one shot here to fix the problem, so I go
> straight for the fix.

.... yet you fix nothing. Nowhere is your prescription adopted.

> And *that's* how I'm different in a live situation, and get hired and
> rehired to teach.

Go back and see how your methods have been adopted. You are booked
because you are famous, and famous for all the wrong things. You are a
celebrity because you are different and, as usual, you are interesting
to listen to but of no practical use.

Again, I have no doubt of your skill with Perl. Nor that with
self-publicism. But I have come across many who have contributed more to
the Perl community that yourself, and am sure that you are lauded only
because you are loud.

I am sincerely sorry that your personal situation is so severe. Things
aren't so great for myself, and I am grateful to be able to post to this
list and receive greater understanding from each post.

Rob




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 01:25, Randal L. Schwartz w=
rote:
>>>>>> "Rob" == Rob Dixon writes:
> To discredit this post, as well as your other claims, I'm actually going
> through the worst period in my life, exceeding my criminal arrest and
> conviction in 1995, which I had hoped would be the "forever lowest
> times".  These past 18 months put that as a mere bump.  If you'=
ve
> followed my blogs and tweets, you'd know the main details.
>
> Please leave your armchair psychology at home.


Well, not intending to put salt on the wound, but by the same token,
you also don't know whether the person you are writing to is also
going through a tough time. They [we] may not have a blog and are
probably not well-known enough to have a blog that other people will
read :-), but they may have problems too at the time and all they
wanted was to ask a Perl question.


> If someone comes here looking for a compliment for bad code simply
> because they've made an attempt, they're confused about what it takes to
> become a programmer.


Hmmmm, I more inclined to believe that programming is a fairly large
field. Large enough to have many definitions of what a programmer is
and not just this one here...


> observation is mad.  But that requires far more interaction than a
> mailing list can provide.  I generally only get one shot here to fix=
the
> problem, so I go straight for the fix. And *that's* how I'm different in
> a live situation, and get hired and rehired to teach.


Actually, I think there are many types of teachers and someone who
uses a completely different style from you can also be "hired and
rehired to teach". However, their students and clients will just be
people that are complete opposite from your audience. And...that's
not a problem because there are enough potential students to keep both
types of teachers (and other types in between) working.

In any case, every time this issue comes up (annual event?), one thing
that I have not understood about this list is that there seems to be
only two groups of people here: the experts and everyone else. I
thought it would be more efficient to have multiple levels: experts
--> advanced --> intermediate --> beginner. That way if some newbie
does something that upsets the experts, rather than belittling
him/her, s/he will just skip the post and let some intermediate person
answer the question.

It's like asking a university professor to teach preschool children.
The professor knows heaps but wouldn't it make more sense to let the
preschool teacher teach. Not saying this person is "lower class", but
probably has better experience and understanding about the kids.

It seems how our education (regardless of the country we're from)
works; why couldn't it work for this list? If experts skipped really
newbie postings; they also might end up with a lower blood pressure in
the long run...

Ray

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob Dixon"
To: "Randal L. Schwartz"
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2011 12:21 PM
Subject: Re: Nature of this list


> On 21/04/2011 17:25, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>>
>> People come online to learn Perl.
>
> Yes! But you have succumbed to Germanic syntax where asentence needsonly
> spaces tomakesense. It is 'on line'.

'Online,' in the above context, is both proper and correct in at least one
sizeable region. Now, if he were looking to buy Bieber tickets...


I just signed-up for this list, but had to double-check that I hadn't
accidentally subscribed to a Python mailing. ("I came here for a Perl
education.")



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On Thu, April 21, 2011 1:22 pm, Raymond Wan wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 01:25, Randal L. Schwartz m>
> wrote:
>>>>>>> "Rob" == Rob Dixon writes:
>> To discredit this post, as well as your other claims, I'm actually goi=
ng
>> through the worst period in my life, exceeding my criminal arrest and
>> conviction in 1995, which I had hoped would be the "forever lowest
>> times".  These past 18 months put that as a mere bump.  If y=
ou've
>> followed my blogs and tweets, you'd know the main details.
>>
>> Please leave your armchair psychology at home.
>
>
> Well, not intending to put salt on the wound, but by the same token,
> you also don't know whether the person you are writing to is also
> going through a tough time. They [we] may not have a blog and are
> probably not well-known enough to have a blog that other people will
> read :-), but they may have problems too at the time and all they
> wanted was to ask a Perl question.
>
>
>> If someone comes here looking for a compliment for bad code simply
>> because they've made an attempt, they're confused about what it takes =
to
>> become a programmer.
>
>
> Hmmmm, I more inclined to believe that programming is a fairly large
> field. Large enough to have many definitions of what a programmer is
> and not just this one here...
>
>
>> observation is mad.  But that requires far more interaction than =
a
>> mailing list can provide.  I generally only get one shot here to =
fix
>> the
>> problem, so I go straight for the fix. And *that's* how I'm different =
in
>> a live situation, and get hired and rehired to teach.
>
>
> Actually, I think there are many types of teachers and someone who
> uses a completely different style from you can also be "hired and
> rehired to teach". However, their students and clients will just be
> people that are complete opposite from your audience. And...that's
> not a problem because there are enough potential students to keep both
> types of teachers (and other types in between) working.
>
> In any case, every time this issue comes up (annual event?), one thing
> that I have not understood about this list is that there seems to be
> only two groups of people here: the experts and everyone else. I
> thought it would be more efficient to have multiple levels: experts
> --> advanced --> intermediate --> beginner. That way if some newbie
> does something that upsets the experts, rather than belittling
> him/her, s/he will just skip the post and let some intermediate person
> answer the question.
>
> It's like asking a university professor to teach preschool children.
> The professor knows heaps but wouldn't it make more sense to let the
> preschool teacher teach. Not saying this person is "lower class", but
> probably has better experience and understanding about the kids.
>
> It seems how our education (regardless of the country we're from)
> works; why couldn't it work for this list? If experts skipped really
> newbie postings; they also might end up with a lower blood pressure in
> the long run...
>
> Ray

Well put. Never thought of it that way... makes sense. I'm in many
mailing lists, and when I was first getting up to speed with Linux, Perl,
bash, etc, I was very active. I am still subscribed to many, but find
myself just clicking on the interesting topics, etc, and ignore the simpl=
e
ones, just for that reason, I feel there are many at that level that will
and can answer them. Why would an expert in the field answer many of the
questions in here if it gets them upset? This is a "beginners list", not
advanced.


--=20
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

Hi Randal (and everybody),

On Thursday 21 Apr 2011 19:25:40 Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> >>>>> "Rob" == Rob Dixon writes:
> Rob> As I mentioned in a previous post, you have softened recently. So
> Rob> it is likely that your life has improved and you are better
> Rob> provided for, and no longer have the need to abuse. I am very happy
> Rob> for you, and for the rest of the world who would read this list.
>
> To discredit this post, as well as your other claims, I'm actually going
> through the worst period in my life, exceeding my criminal arrest and
> conviction in 1995, which I had hoped would be the "forever lowest
> times". These past 18 months put that as a mere bump. If you've
> followed my blogs and tweets, you'd know the main details.
>
> Please leave your armchair psychology at home.
>
> You may not like that I don't pull punches with others, probably because
> you're unwilling to be that direct. You'd rather be liked than to have
> an effect on others. I'm not that. I don't care if people like me, if
> what I do will eventually change behavior for others. I'm about the
> world, not about me. I want to leave this world a better place.
>
> People come online to learn Perl. If they write code that sucks, that's
> not the way Perl should be coded. I'll let them know straight out.
> There's too much bad Perl being coded out there. I know... clients hire
> me to sort through the muck, and pay me a decent wage to do that. So if
> anything, I'm being counterproductive, because my goal is that I become
> no longer needed. :)
>

In that context, I should note that I've written about the "Parable of the
Broken Window" in relation to the software world here:

http://shlomif-tech.livejournal.com/741.html

There's more about the Broken Window Fallacy here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window

What I wanted to say is that we shouldn't try to create unnecessary problems,
that we will later have to fix, because, as software developers, we have
enough to do to advance the state of the art (and to solve completely new
problems for the first and only time), and solving such man-made problems will
also make us feel more frustrated.

Regards,

Shlomi Fish

--
------------------------------------------------------------ -----
Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/
Chuck Norris/etc. Facts - http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/

"You are banished! You are banished! You are banished!
Hey! I'm just kidding!"

Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

--bcaec52e64f5f039bf04a1870c40
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Sadly the great work Casey West and Kevin Meltzer did by starting a perl
beginners list was tainted by individuals like Randal Schwartz. I was a
direct target of this bullying

Randal is arrogant and a bully and is the reason why I moved on from this
list years ago.

Ian

--bcaec52e64f5f039bf04a1870c40--

Re: Nature of this list

>>>>> "Ian" == Ian writes:

Ian> Sadly the great work Casey West and Kevin Meltzer did by starting a perl
Ian> beginners list was tainted by individuals like Randal Schwartz. I was a
Ian> direct target of this bullying

Ian> Randal is arrogant and a bully and is the reason why I moved on from this
Ian> list years ago.

You misunderstood something I said, which when taken in context, was
appropriate then and I would say it again today. It was a reaction to
something you said, which had I known *more* about the situation, might
have come out differently, but it wasn't clear from the post you made.

See http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.beginners/2009/08/msg108 709.html

I'll let my words stand for themselves.

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095

Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

--000325556d72414abe04a187d005
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Randal> If you imply that you have a proven solution, you are lying to
them. I ask
Randal> that you don't lie in that way.
http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.beginners/2009/08/msg108 718.html

Ian> I did NOT lie, nor did I mislead the list in anyway by supplying code that
Ian> did not work.
Ian> Each line of code I posted was tested, produced the desired results, albeit
Ian> in a format the requester could not use at first.

Without looking at the code or testing it, you accused me of lying.

Ian

--000325556d72414abe04a187d005--

Re: Nature of this list

>>>>> "Ian" == Ian writes:

Randal> If you imply that you have a proven solution, you are lying to
Ian> them. I ask
Randal> that you don't lie in that way.
Ian> http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.beginners/2009/08/msg108 718.html

Ian> I did NOT lie, nor did I mislead the list in anyway by supplying code that
Ian> did not work.
Ian> Each line of code I posted was tested, produced the desired results, albeit
Ian> in a format the requester could not use at first.

Ian> Without looking at the code or testing it, you accused me of lying.

Once again, as before, you are taking this paragraph without relying
on the preceding paragraphs. Please STOP THAT. You have to read that
entire letter as a whole. This paragraph *depends* on the earlier one:

(And I haven't read the rest of the thread, but I'm guessing that it
actually didn't work.)

And since that's false, the rest DOESN'T APPLY. IT DOESN'T APPLY TO YOU.
GET IT?

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095

Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

--0016e6dd993a38076704a188d0b6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

> (And I haven't read the rest of the thread, but I'm guessing that it
> actually didn't work.)

> And since that's false, the rest DOESN'T APPLY. IT DOESN'T APPLY TO YOU.
> GET IT?

YOU don't get it. That is the problem. You think you can insult people on
the list and then just walk away.

If you say " I ask that you don't lie in that way." what does that mean?
Does it mean that it "DOESN'T APPLY"?
NO it means that you asked me not to lie.

Read that thread and read the threads that leads up to it and you will see
there were a LOT of other people that read your comments to me the same way
I did. As an insult.

The code did work. that was the crux of the matter.
If you are to arrogant to verify it, do not assume.

Here we have a whole thread dedicated to bullying and still you don't get
it.

Ian

--0016e6dd993a38076704a188d0b6--

Re: Nature of this list

--20cf307f3192340d1604a18d461a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Randal L. Schwartz
wrote:

> My biggest problem (I think) is that I'm clearly not my code. If
> someone complains about my code, no matter how harshly, *I* don't take
> it as an affront to *me*. I just learn from it, and get better.
>
> So, I project that same level of independence on others, and have a
> really hard time relating that someone would take a criticism of code as
> a personal attack.
>
> I suspect that most *mature* programmers have already sorted this out,
> even if they are beginners in Perl.


In my experience, this is more about anger management than about
programming, but maturity is the right description. As we grow we should
all learn that criticisms and judgments of code (or any other behavior or
skill) are separate from statements about a person's worth. We shouldn't
mix the two when we're looking at other people's code, and when other people
conflate the two we shouldn't get drawn into their zero-sum arms race.

John

--20cf307f3192340d1604a18d461a--

Re: Nature of this list

--0015175ce0ba88817904a1911cf0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hi everyone,
Sorry for intruding, I just recently joined this list, I have the list
messages usually skip my inbox, but somehow this one did not and as I read,
I thought I might contribute by letting you know that there are different
"types" of Perl beginners, particularly one type, which is not a programmer
and is never going to be one. I am in that group.
I am a forensic geneticist. I have studied medicine, human biology and now I
am doing my PhD in forensic genetics. I like programming, I remember being 8
years old sitting on my T84 making silly programs in Basic, then on the
Apple II, following a Pascal tutorial, then in 1994, taking a shot at HTML.
And that was it, my life went in another direction and I didn't do anymore
of that.
Now as a PhD student, I am supposed to have my hands on everything including
high throughput sequencing data analysis. I started last year by learning R
by myself, for statistical analysis, doing some tutorials so I could do
basic stuff with bash and learning my way around in Ubuntu. But that was not
enough, so recently, I took the Unix and Perl for Biologists (
http://korflab.ucdavis.edu/Unix_and_Perl/) course. I do not program
everyday, which makes remembering and getting better at it very hard, I have
never taken a real live course with instructors in anything programming
related, I have no background in it. After taking the Unix and Perl course I
was able to solve a problem with a simple Perl script, which seemed
monumental if done manually and I am really proud of myself for that. But
reality is that I wont get much better at it than this, I have no time for
that, I have to learn about other things too that are part of my PhD, and
maybe someday when I am done, I might be able to work with a programmer.
The thing is, that having my background it is hard to "research" a question
before you post it, because you don't know where to look, or there are
simply too many options and lack the knowledge to discern which one is the
right one.
I am always terrified of posting any question in a list, because I don't
want to be put down (it is not a matter of thick skin, but who in their
right mind, unless they are masochists wants to be put down?), and mainly I
don't want to waste my time, if someone answers me: "you should read the
manual", has that person considered that sometimes these manuals are written
by/for programmers, and its like reading klingon for us regular people?

It took me several tries, and lots of tears of frustration to really get
into R, because I just could not understand the manual and the tutorial was
not helpful either (I finally tracked down a programmer friend of mine who
recommended R in a Nutshell and that was what got me over the first hurdle
-learning to read the manual!-).
In the beginning when I started learning, I looked for answers in the help
lists and it was very intimidating, I saw similar questions to mine which
were answered so rudely and were of no help at all, I started thinking that
these lists seemed like a medium for people who know their stuff to feel
superior and good about themselves while putting down others. I finally
gathered the courage to post a question and was told to "read the manual",
the end. Not helpful at all, and also patronizing.

Now posting in lists is truly my very, very last resort, I really think
about what I am going to write, "research" all I can, and proof read my
message 1000 times and gather the courage to press 'send', sometimes only to
be ignored (and I can't decide what is worse, being put down or ignored).
For me this is a very bad thing, because there is no one else in my
department I can ask questions, if I Google stuff, there is a gazillion
pages to check in order to sift out moderately useful stuff, this means a
lot of time spent in a wild goose chase, time I don't have.

Not all of it is bad, of course, I have made 'friends' in some lists, who
have been kind and patient and have helped me become better at what I am
doing, and in the end I am really grateful the lists exists and that there
is people out there willing to share their knowledge, so when I read the
statement of purpose of this list, I was very impressed to find out that
there were others aware of the problem and wanted to create a list with a
friendly environment, thank you for that.

So please, think about this before answering harshly and being patronizing.
Not all of us Perl Beginners have a programming background, anyone who is a
beginner to programming needs to learn how to read the documentation/manuals
first, sometimes a silly question with an obvious answer, is there because
the person does not have someone next to them to discuss out loud beginner
stuff, and once the question is written and posted, the answer sometimes
might come by itself. Lastly, if someone out there is thinking: "well, if
you are not a programmer, you shouldn't be here", all I have to say is: I am
not a programmer and I will never be one, but reality dictates that I learn
some of this stuff and there is no other way to this, and besides in my
case, I enjoy it very much -- which makes it very hard to manage the time I
"waste" on programming :)

Thanks for taking time to teach others, to share your knowledge and keep up
the friendliness! It is very much appreciated! :)

L



On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 5:07 AM, John Refior wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Randal L. Schwartz
> wrote:
>
> > My biggest problem (I think) is that I'm clearly not my code. If
> > someone complains about my code, no matter how harshly, *I* don't take
> > it as an affront to *me*. I just learn from it, and get better.
> >
> > So, I project that same level of independence on others, and have a
> > really hard time relating that someone would take a criticism of code as
> > a personal attack.
> >
> > I suspect that most *mature* programmers have already sorted this out,
> > even if they are beginners in Perl.
>
>
> In my experience, this is more about anger management than about
> programming, but maturity is the right description. As we grow we should
> all learn that criticisms and judgments of code (or any other behavior or
> skill) are separate from statements about a person's worth. We shouldn't
> mix the two when we're looking at other people's code, and when other
> people
> conflate the two we shouldn't get drawn into their zero-sum arms race.
>
> John
>

--0015175ce0ba88817904a1911cf0--

Re: Nature of this list

On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 04:56, Randal L. Schwartz w=
rote:
>>>>>> "Ian" == Ian   writes:
> Ian> Randal is arrogant and a bully and is the reason why I moved on from=
this
> Ian> list years ago.
>
> You misunderstood something I said, which when taken in context, was
> appropriate then and I would say it again today.  It was a reaction =
to
> something you said, which had I known *more* about the situation, might
> have come out differently, but it wasn't clear from the post you made.
>
> See http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.beginners/2009/08/msg108 709.html
>
> I'll let my words stand for themselves.


It is interesting that you two are talking about this thread way back
in 2009. I was not involved but was contributing as a third party. I
can't say I'm anywhere near as hurt as Ian, but I will say that *this*
particular thread made me realize that I'd probably ought to step away
from the list, too. My activity on the list dropped right after. Of
course, given the number of people on this list and my relatively
little contribution, it surely wasn't a big dent on the list's
traffic. :-)

But, if both sides (both of you) and third-party-people like me still
remember exchanges on this list from almost 2 years ago, isn't it time
to ask if any of us should approaching this list differently... I'm
sure the majority of the nastiness of the postings would be gone if
these discussions were done face-to-face. Imagine reading some of the
things said in that 2009 thread and this one to someone sitting in
right front of you... Especially the parts in upper case
characters...

Ray

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

>>>>> "Raymond" == Raymond Wan writes:

Raymond> But, if both sides (both of you) and third-party-people like me still
Raymond> remember exchanges on this list from almost 2 years ago,

I didn't remember it at all. I had to google for my name and his. I
*moved on*. I had to re-read the entire thread for context to respond
(burning about 20 minutes of what would have been otherwise productive
time) just to have a response to his allegation. And in the light of
having reviewed the thread, the key element (that his solution actually
*was* proper) came to me, even though it didn't at that point.

But it's why I wrote the response as I did. I said "here are the
preconditions, and if this is all true, then you are lying". What he
fails to understand (and I wish he would) is that the preconditions
didn't apply, and therefore "you are lying" doesn't apply to him. He
failed to read the whole letter. He failed to understand that the last
few paragraphs clearly didn't apply to him.

I wished I had had time to read the whole thread the first time. But I
don't have time for that anymore here. I only have a few moments from
time to time to check the answers, not the questions.

And now I've burned another hour on this issue, when I could have been
productively helping other people. {sigh} That's the *real* cost of
this.

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095

Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

>>>>> "Lali" == Lali writes:

Lali> So please, think about this before answering harshly and being
Lali> patronizing. Not all of us Perl Beginners have a programming
Lali> background, anyone who is a beginner to programming needs to learn
Lali> how to read the documentation/manuals first, sometimes a silly
Lali> question with an obvious answer, is there because the person does
Lali> not have someone next to them to discuss out loud beginner stuff,
Lali> and once the question is written and posted, the answer sometimes
Lali> might come by itself. Lastly, if someone out there is thinking:
Lali> "well, if you are not a programmer, you shouldn't be here", all I
Lali> have to say is: I am not a programmer and I will never be one, but
Lali> reality dictates that I learn some of this stuff and there is no
Lali> other way to this, and besides in my case, I enjoy it very much --
Lali> which makes it very hard to manage the time I "waste" on
Lali> programming :)

Thank you for that post. I just realized something this morning. If
you go back through my "complaints" here and elsewhere over the years,
they fall into two main camps:

(1) people who answer someone else's question badly
(2) people who are clearly cheating on their homework

I have no issue with people asking genuine questions, and have answered
many of those over the years (nicely :). I also have no issue with
ptople who *answer* properly.

But I will not tolerate these two camps.

This thread makes that clear. I took someone to task for answering
badly. (Turns out they hadn't, but that wasn't clear from their post.)

Therefore, you're safe from "my wrath" since you'd only be asking
questions and not trying to answer someone else.

No promises about Uri though. :)
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095

Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On 11-04-23 11:01 AM, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> Therefore, you're safe from "my wrath" since you'd only be asking
> questions and not trying to answer someone else.

Anyone can be safe from your wrath simply by setting up a message filter
that deletes your posts unread.

Or they can unsubsrcibe from the list and learn Python or Ruby.


--
Just my 0.00000002 million dollars worth,
Shawn

Confusion is the first step of understanding.

Programming is as much about organization and communication
as it is about coding.

The secret to great software: Fail early & often.

Eliminate software piracy: use only FLOSS.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

--00151747343097718104a19801b4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi All,

Initially I didn't feel like getting into this discussion, because for
starters I am really new here, but I also I generally don't like to argue. =
I
spend most of days arguing about some or other scientific question, that
when I come home I just want to learn perl. I think one think that I haven'=
t
seen here is this, programming is fun! At least it is for me, it is like a
game, you are given a problem and you have to solve it. The first time you
solve it, it is usually ugly but functional, than you try to make it more
elegant. Science used to be like that, I don know if it is anymore.

I actually can't complain about this list, the times I posted, I got very
positive feedback and more importantly I learned a lot. Which brings me to
Peter's early post. See, I have been using perl for years now, but I don
know perl. I cau use it under a very specific set of circumstances where
BioPerl does its magic. So I decided to learn it and I had to start from th=
e
beginning. Now, I spent a good chucnk of early career in Science studying
exactly what Peter was talking about: how do people learn? One thing that
most camps in this area (and there are many: cognitive learning,
behavioristic learning, Vigostkyian and so forth) agree is that most people
have no idea of how they learn and that's why most people make horrible
teachers. That happens in Science all the time. A lot of the most brilliant
minds in the world, turn out to be the worst teacher's ever. Partly, I
believe, because they are brilliant. I think part of being very good in
something is not in understanding the details, but understand the
generalities. If you understand the main concepts of filed, the general
ones, than you can apply that knowledge anywhere and you won't be like me. =
I
only understand a little speck of perl. I understand it quite well, but
outside of its scope I am useless. That's where sometimes we (and I
personally do it a lot) fail, because the logic behind our field to damn
obvious, that how can anyone miss it? It is only obvious however, because a=
t
some point we mastered those general concepts. And more often than not one
can only master the general concepts of related fields, of course that is
unless your are brilliant, and some people just are. So I think, it is more
than the case of the bell curve Peter described, some people just don't kno=
w
the obvious, but sometimes we forget that the obvious is only obvious to
some. Hence the comment: go and read the documentation. If you don't
understand some basics any man page could be written in greek and it may be
more clear than in english. :)

I haven't been in this list for long, but I got to say I like it. The human
conflict is never going to go away and that brings me to my last point. I
think some peole wish they were their code as some scientists wish they wer=
e
their science. Because your code can be debugged, improved, can be made
almost perfect, but as Larry put it so well: People get really annoyed when
you try to debug them. By my 0.00000001 million dollar worth is that
sometimes we have to go beyond the words and look for the intentions, cause
words, especially in the internet are flawed and often disconnected from
their context. And I kind of understand both sides, it is hard to be harshl=
y
criticized, but at the same time when I see pseudoscience it makes me want
to just go out and kill someone. The discussions may never end and some
people will always be offended by critic and some people will always be
offended by ugly code. But here I tend to agree with Randal, we must
remember that the individual value of the human-been is in who we are and
not what you code or write. And who we are is beyond the scope not only of
this list, but of the whole Internet I believe, because you don really
relate to people here, you relate to emails and posts. That not who we are
or at least it doesn't have to be.

I am here, because I enjoy learning perl, and I giggle like a little boy
every time my programs work and I know that weather in a nice or a rough
way, people here will help me improve. So it is my gain and I can live with
the occasional your code sucks or the capital letters.

And Lali, you better get a thick skin, because weather you like or not, in
science you going to get nastiness all of the time. I don think it is the
correct way to be, but it is the way it is. It will help you stay sane,
specially during your quals :)

Cheers,

T.



On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Shawn H Corey wrote:

> On 11-04-23 11:01 AM, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>
>> Therefore, you're safe from "my wrath" since you'd only be asking
>> questions and not trying to answer someone else.
>>
>
> Anyone can be safe from your wrath simply by setting up a message filter
> that deletes your posts unread.
>
> Or they can unsubsrcibe from the list and learn Python or Ruby.
>
>
>
> --
> Just my 0.00000002 million dollars worth,
> Shawn
>
> Confusion is the first step of understanding.
>
> Programming is as much about organization and communication
> as it is about coding.
>
> The secret to great software: Fail early & often.
>
> Eliminate software piracy: use only FLOSS.
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
> http://learn.perl.org/
>
>
>


--=20
"Education is not to be used to promote obscurantism." - Theodonius
Dobzhansky.

"Gracias a la vida que me ha dado tanto
Me ha dado el sonido y el abecedario
Con =E9l, las palabras que pienso y declaro
Madre, amigo, hermano
Y luz alumbrando la ruta del alma del que estoy amando

Gracias a la vida que me ha dado tanto
Me ha dado la marcha de mis pies cansados
Con ellos anduve ciudades y charcos
Playas y desiertos, monta=F1as y llanos
Y la casa tuya, tu calle y tu patio"

Violeta Parra - Gracias a la Vida

Tiago S. F. Hori
PhD Candidate - Ocean Science Center-Memorial University of Newfoundland

--00151747343097718104a19801b4--

Re: Nature of this list

On 11-04-23 11:55 AM, Tiago Hori wrote:
> And Lali, you better get a thick skin, because weather you like or not, in
> science you going to get nastiness all of the time. I don think it is the
> correct way to be, but it is the way it is. It will help you stay sane,
> specially during your quals:)

One editor of the New York Times said that 9 out of 10 letters to the
editor are nothing but complaints...and the other 10% have a compliment
to go with their complaints.

People complain; it's the nature of the beast. But that doesn't mean
they have to be rude about it. Calling someone stupid is rude. Calling
their best efforts stupid is an indirect way of calling them stupid and
if anything, even ruder. Generally, I just ignore the rudeness and if
it becomes too much, I go somewhere else. After all, the first rule of
the internet is: You can be ignored in less than 5 seconds.

If the Perl community wants to grow and become more relevant, it is
going to have to call people to task when they are rude, especially in a
beginners group.


--
Just my 0.00000002 million dollars worth,
Shawn

Confusion is the first step of understanding.

Programming is as much about organization and communication
as it is about coding.

The secret to great software: Fail early & often.

Eliminate software piracy: use only FLOSS.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

--20cf3054a371f4426904a198874e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

> People complain; it's the nature of the beast. But that doesn't mean the=
y
> have to be rude about it. Calling someone stupid is rude. Calling their
> best efforts stupid is an indirect way of calling them stupid and if
> anything, even ruder. Generally, I just ignore the rudeness and if it
> becomes too much, I go somewhere else. After all, the first rule of the
> internet is: You can be ignored in less than 5 seconds.
>
> If the Perl community wants to grow and become more relevant, it is going
> to have to call people to task when they are rude, especially in a beginn=
ers
> group.
>
>
No, no one needs to be rude, but some people are. Some people are rude
because they are just stupid, but I like to believe that the vast majority
is rude because they don't know any better. I just think that getting a
thick skin is not synonymous with accepting the rudeness. I try to very har=
d
(and sometimes fail) not to be rude when reviewing scientific articles for
publications for example, but I had to learn to get a thick skin, cause mor=
e
often than not the reviews I get are just nasty! :)

T.

--=20
"Education is not to be used to promote obscurantism." - Theodonius
Dobzhansky.

"Gracias a la vida que me ha dado tanto
Me ha dado el sonido y el abecedario
Con =E9l, las palabras que pienso y declaro
Madre, amigo, hermano
Y luz alumbrando la ruta del alma del que estoy amando

Gracias a la vida que me ha dado tanto
Me ha dado la marcha de mis pies cansados
Con ellos anduve ciudades y charcos
Playas y desiertos, monta=F1as y llanos
Y la casa tuya, tu calle y tu patio"

Violeta Parra - Gracias a la Vida

Tiago S. F. Hori
PhD Candidate - Ocean Science Center-Memorial University of Newfoundland

--20cf3054a371f4426904a198874e--

Re: Nature of this list

Tangential to the topic, but related to the "traditional" programming =
culture some have described -- I've programmed professionally since =
1978, although I haven't come anywhere close to Randal's heights. In =
the early '90s I was a developer at a DBMS vendor in Kendall Square, =
Cambridge, which was founded by, and employed, some of MIT and Boston =
College's Best and Brightest - people with "a rather high opinion of =
themselves," as the office mom mildly said. After the first few times =
the Principal Software Architect (whisperingly referred to as "God") =
reviewed my code, I finally went to his office and had a private chat =
with him. (Poor guy apparently hadn't heard anyone tell him they felt =
belittled or scorned by his tone before.) Given that we were face to =
face, and I was using a calm voice, and he *couldn't* actually just sock =
me in the nose, or fire me, he had to listen to me. He had no problem, =
nor lost any face, dropping the attitude real quick. I was happier; he =
got to spend a bit less time being pissed off and severe; I really =
learned a LOT of excellent practical engineering from him; and I talked =
him up to those I later mentored. I see nothing of value that was lost. =
=20

That's all just to say that, while the traditional sci/tech culture may =
still be rife with big shots and ass-hattery, it's worth summoning the =
guts to look straight into someone's eyes and quietly insist upon being =
treated with common courtesy. They're actually not as dumb as they act! =
:D

Chap=

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On 11-04-23 12:33 PM, Tiago Hori wrote:
> Some people are rude
> because they are just stupid, but I like to believe that the vast majority
> is rude because they don't know any better.

I met some stupid people and they're a not rude. In fact, they're often
nicer than most people with more brains.

The problem is that some people see things that irritate them and decide
to take out their angry and frustration on complete strangers. But
there's no excuse for their behaviour.

As the turtle says, "Mellow out, dude."


--
Just my 0.00000002 million dollars worth,
Shawn

Confusion is the first step of understanding.

Programming is as much about organization and communication
as it is about coding.

The secret to great software: Fail early & often.

Eliminate software piracy: use only FLOSS.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

--001517478582f3580a04a198b995
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I met some stupid people and they're a not rude. In fact, they're often
nicer than most people with more brains.

>
> The problem is that some people see things that irritate them and decide =
to
> take out their angry and frustration on complete strangers. But there's =
no
> excuse for their behaviour.
>
> As the turtle says, "Mellow out, dude."
>
>
:) I love it!

T.

--=20
"Education is not to be used to promote obscurantism." - Theodonius
Dobzhansky.

"Gracias a la vida que me ha dado tanto
Me ha dado el sonido y el abecedario
Con =E9l, las palabras que pienso y declaro
Madre, amigo, hermano
Y luz alumbrando la ruta del alma del que estoy amando

Gracias a la vida que me ha dado tanto
Me ha dado la marcha de mis pies cansados
Con ellos anduve ciudades y charcos
Playas y desiertos, monta=F1as y llanos
Y la casa tuya, tu calle y tu patio"

Violeta Parra - Gracias a la Vida

Tiago S. F. Hori
PhD Candidate - Ocean Science Center-Memorial University of Newfoundland

--001517478582f3580a04a198b995--

Re: Nature of this list

--20cf300fb095ff54aa04a198d151
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Chap Harrison wrote:

> That's all just to say that, while the traditional sci/tech culture may
> still be rife with big shots and ass-hattery, it's worth summoning the gu=
ts
> to look straight into someone's eyes and quietly insist upon being treate=
d
> with common courtesy. They're actually not as dumb as they act! :D


Chap, that's an excellent point and your story is a great teaching story.
I've been in your shoes before. You know, at my children's school they have
a rigid anti-bullying policy. If you, as a child, have been called out for
bullying you're required to fill out this worksheet (fair warning: comic
sans ahead):
http://www.mtlsd.org/lincoln_elementary/stuff/bully%20think- about-it.pdf

I'll copy for those without PDF readers.

1. What did you do that doesn=92t fit with our Lincoln School Rules? (Be
specific and start with =93I=94)

2. Why was this behavior wrong or hurtful to others? (Who did you hurt? Ho=
w
do you know you hurt that person?)

3. What problem were you trying to solve? (Think about it=85were you tryin=
g
to have fun? Did you want someone to listen to you or leave you alone? Were
you trying to impress your friends? Were you angry about something else?)

4. Next time you have that problem, how will you solve it without hurting
someone else? (Please list at least three ways and choose one)

I'd say this worksheet applies to our experiences on the beginners mailing
list. If you've been called out for bullying, whatever the form, it would b=
e
prudent to fill out this worksheet. The skill of accepting constructive
criticism is a learned one; not everyone has it. If you do, though, it mean=
s
your effectiveness within *this* group dynamic will not diminish on account
of failing to hear your audience's feedback.

Cheers,

--=20
Casey West

--20cf300fb095ff54aa04a198d151--

Re: Nature of this list

On Saturday 23 Apr 2011 17:53:30 Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> >>>>> "Raymond" == Raymond Wan writes:
> Raymond> But, if both sides (both of you) and third-party-people like me
> still Raymond> remember exchanges on this list from almost 2 years ago,
>=20
> I didn't remember it at all. I had to google for my name and his. I
> *moved on*. I had to re-read the entire thread for context to respond
> (burning about 20 minutes of what would have been otherwise productive
> time) just to have a response to his allegation. And in the light of
> having reviewed the thread, the key element (that his solution actually
> *was* proper) came to me, even though it didn't at that point.
>=20
> But it's why I wrote the response as I did. I said "here are the
> preconditions, and if this is all true, then you are lying". What he
> fails to understand (and I wish he would) is that the preconditions
> didn't apply, and therefore "you are lying" doesn't apply to him. He
> failed to read the whole letter. He failed to understand that the last
> few paragraphs clearly didn't apply to him.

Just a note about etymology and semantics - it is a good idea to *never*=20
accuse someone of "lying" in an online forum. Avoid using this word. To quo=
te=20
some definitionf of "to lie":

=ABTo give false information intentionally. »
=2D- http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/lie#Verb_2

=ABto make an untrue statement with intent to deceive =BB
=2D- http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lie%5B3%5D

In short it is a very strong accusation, a deliberate act of dishonesty, th=
at=20
to many Israeli Jews bring associations of various Biblical passages with a=
=20
lot of fire and brimstone and what not. Most honest people will never lie i=
n=20
this way, or excluding the natural http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_lies=
or=20
the natural acceptable lies when under threat of force, etc., but these are=
=20
beyond the scope of this.

When someone is saying something that's false or incorrect, they are likely=
=20
not saying it deliberately. They may be misled or too clueless about it. Th=
ey=20
may believe that their way is superior (after weighing all the arguments) -=
=20
like "XML::Simple is great." vs. "XML::Simple should be called XML::Evil"=20
(things that are a matter of choice rather than absolute ethics and moralit=
y).=20
Or it could be other forms of ignorance that I forgot.

So it's a good rule of thumb to *never* accuse someone of lying. There are=
=20
many other words "That's not true", "you are misleading" "wrong" , etc.

>=20
> I wished I had had time to read the whole thread the first time. But I
> don't have time for that anymore here. I only have a few moments from
> time to time to check the answers, not the questions.
>=20
> And now I've burned another hour on this issue, when I could have been
> productively helping other people. {sigh} That's the *real* cost of
> this.

My psychotherapist told me that I should try to maximise pleasure (without=
=20
getting into http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedonism , naturlaly), and not=20
productivity, because I have an obsession with being productive most of the=
=20
time and it can make me stressed. It's a good advice to follow - it's OK to=
=20
waste time. Maybe sometimes you should even do something that is a waste of=
=20
time.

Regards,

Shlomi Fish

=2D-=20
=2D--------------------------------------------------------- -------
Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/
Rethinking CPAN - http://shlom.in/rethinking-cpan

95% of Programmers consider 95% of the code they did not write, in the bott=
om
5%.

Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On 11-04-23 12:53 PM, Casey West wrote:
> 1. What did you do that doesn=92t fit with our Lincoln School Rules? (B=
e
> specific and start with =93I=94)

Wow. The very first thing they have to think about is their contempt=20
for the school authorities and not their victims' feelings. No wonder=20
why they tought they could get away with it. All they had to do is hide=20
their actions from the authorities. You know, there's something a=20
little bit sick about a society that insists that the authorities are=20
the only ones capable of deciding right and wrong.


--=20
Just my 0.00000002 million dollars worth,
Shawn

Confusion is the first step of understanding.

Programming is as much about organization and communication
as it is about coding.

The secret to great software: Fail early & often.

Eliminate software piracy: use only FLOSS.

--=20
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 23:53, Randal L. Schwartz w=
rote:
>>>>>> "Raymond" == Raymond Wan writes:
>
> Raymond> But, if both sides (both of you) and third-party-people like me =
still
> Raymond> remember exchanges on this list from almost 2 years ago,
>
> I didn't remember it at all.  I had to google for my name and his. =
 I


Fair enough -- I stand corrected. :-) Definitely underestimated the
ability of Google. ;-)



> But it's why I wrote the response as I did.  I said "here are the
> preconditions, and if this is all true, then you are lying". What he
> fails to understand (and I wish he would) is that the preconditions
> didn't apply, and therefore "you are lying" doesn't apply to him.  H=
e
> failed to read the whole letter.  He failed to understand that the l=
ast
> few paragraphs clearly didn't apply to him.


Well, I think it's safe to say that there are certain words that have
a good chance of being misinterpretted and "lying" is perhaps one of
them, especially if the reader cannot see the word "I" before and a
smiley face afterwards... By this I mean that if it's reached a level
where it is preceeded by "you", it is hard to expect anyone to see the
entire context clearly anymore. For better or for worse, I'd probably
be the same...


> And now I've burned another hour on this issue, when I could have been
> productively helping other people.  {sigh} That's the *real* cost of
> this.


Well, IMHO, spending an hour to reflect on what was said to someone is
never a waste of time...

Ray

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On Apr 23, 2011, at 12:22 PM, Shlomi Fish wrote:

> Just a note about etymology and semantics - it is a good idea to *never*
> accuse someone of "lying" in an online forum.

But Shlomi - don't you remember? He "#ifdef'd" it out! :-p

Hee hee.



Chap

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

Hi Tiago,


On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 01:33, Tiago Hori wrote:
> No, no one needs to be rude, but some people are. Some people are rude
> because they are just stupid, but I like to believe that the vast majority
> is rude because they don't know any better. I just think that getting a
> thick skin is not synonymous with accepting the rudeness. I try to very hard
> (and sometimes fail) not to be rude when reviewing scientific articles for
> publications for example, but I had to learn to get a thick skin, cause more
> often than not the reviews I get are just nasty! :)


I'm not so sure about this last point. Yes there are nasty scientific
reviewers out there and the reason is that no one is taught to review
nicely. They've learned to be nasty either from someone they worked
with or, more than likely, from someone else who was nasty to them.

Perhaps people in the scientific community and here on this list
should grow a thicker skin...but then one day, things degenerate and
get out of hand. And you end up potentially losing good scientists or
good Perl programmers...as Shawn quipped, to Python or Ruby. :-) Is
that good for Perl? Ok..."for Perl" is an exaggeration. How about,
"is it good for this mailing list"?

As for the nasty scientific reviewers, IMHO, you should mention it to
the editor of the journal. No, you won't get your paper accepted --
that shouldn't be the point. But as long as you have a good argument
and are *polite* and *constructive* in your response, the editor might
at least take a note of this nasty person and if many complaints come
in, s/he will no longer be asked to review. Again, IMHO, it is
perhaps better than feeling that being nasty is part of the peer
review process and then taking it out on someone else -- a vicious
cycle...

Ray

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

--0015174bf0cc459fa904a1999a8e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

> I'm not so sure about this last point. Yes there are nasty scientific
> reviewers out there and the reason is that no one is taught to review
> nicely. They've learned to be nasty either from someone they worked
> with or, more than likely, from someone else who was nasty to them.
>
> Perhaps people in the scientific community and here on this list
> should grow a thicker skin...but then one day, things degenerate and
> get out of hand. And you end up potentially losing good scientists or
> good Perl programmers...as Shawn quipped, to Python or Ruby. :-) Is
> that good for Perl? Ok..."for Perl" is an exaggeration. How about,
> "is it good for this mailing list"?
>
> As for the nasty scientific reviewers, IMHO, you should mention it to
> the editor of the journal. No, you won't get your paper accepted --
> that shouldn't be the point. But as long as you have a good argument
> and are *polite* and *constructive* in your response, the editor might
> at least take a note of this nasty person and if many complaints come
> in, s/he will no longer be asked to review. Again, IMHO, it is
> perhaps better than feeling that being nasty is part of the peer
> review process and then taking it out on someone else -- a vicious
> cycle...
>
> Ray
>

Ray,

That is an excellent point. It is a vicious cycle, you grow a thick skin to
protect yourself from the nastiness and the nastiness stops mattering, at
which point you are likely to become nasty yourself.

I still believe that one needs to protect oneself from the world, but not,
as you said, at the cost of becoming a jerk. I also believe that it is
possible to do so.

As Che Guevara once said: Hay que endurecese, pero sin perder la ternuara
jamais. One has to make once self stronger, but never at the cost of one's
tenderness.

Cheers,

T.






--=20
"Education is not to be used to promote obscurantism." - Theodonius
Dobzhansky.

"Gracias a la vida que me ha dado tanto
Me ha dado el sonido y el abecedario
Con =E9l, las palabras que pienso y declaro
Madre, amigo, hermano
Y luz alumbrando la ruta del alma del que estoy amando

Gracias a la vida que me ha dado tanto
Me ha dado la marcha de mis pies cansados
Con ellos anduve ciudades y charcos
Playas y desiertos, monta=F1as y llanos
Y la casa tuya, tu calle y tu patio"

Violeta Parra - Gracias a la Vida

Tiago S. F. Hori
PhD Candidate - Ocean Science Center-Memorial University of Newfoundland

--0015174bf0cc459fa904a1999a8e--

Re: Nature of this list

--0016368320ee8e084204a199ab99
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I agree with you Ray, a nasty reply in a professional setting is easy to
fend with a well thought answer.
Having a thick skin, what does that mean? I don't run and throw myself on
my bed and cry my eyes out when I get a harsh critique, but I won't lie and
say that it sits well on me right away, after the bad feelings are sorted
out, a harsh critique usually motivates me to be better. But it has to be a
harsh critique with substance, and those are usually the ones that hurt the
most, if you are convinced you have done a good job, or if you are not aware
you made a mistake, an omission or something of the sorts. On the other
hand, an empty nasty comment really doesn't help anyone, specially a
beginner. But maybe I am a little inexperienced, I have never received a
nasty review for any of my articles, but I did have a particularly nasty
supervisor, and I did speak out and it did have consequences for me, far
more serious than getting an article rejected.

L

On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 7:44 PM, Raymond Wan wrote:

> Hi Tiago,
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 01:33, Tiago Hori wrote:
> > No, no one needs to be rude, but some people are. Some people are rude
> > because they are just stupid, but I like to believe that the vast
> majority
> > is rude because they don't know any better. I just think that getting a
> > thick skin is not synonymous with accepting the rudeness. I try to very
> hard
> > (and sometimes fail) not to be rude when reviewing scientific articles
> for
> > publications for example, but I had to learn to get a thick skin, cause
> more
> > often than not the reviews I get are just nasty! :)
>
>
> I'm not so sure about this last point. Yes there are nasty scientific
> reviewers out there and the reason is that no one is taught to review
> nicely. They've learned to be nasty either from someone they worked
> with or, more than likely, from someone else who was nasty to them.
>
> Perhaps people in the scientific community and here on this list
> should grow a thicker skin...but then one day, things degenerate and
> get out of hand. And you end up potentially losing good scientists or
> good Perl programmers...as Shawn quipped, to Python or Ruby. :-) Is
> that good for Perl? Ok..."for Perl" is an exaggeration. How about,
> "is it good for this mailing list"?
>
> As for the nasty scientific reviewers, IMHO, you should mention it to
> the editor of the journal. No, you won't get your paper accepted --
> that shouldn't be the point. But as long as you have a good argument
> and are *polite* and *constructive* in your response, the editor might
> at least take a note of this nasty person and if many complaints come
> in, s/he will no longer be asked to review. Again, IMHO, it is
> perhaps better than feeling that being nasty is part of the peer
> review process and then taking it out on someone else -- a vicious
> cycle...
>
> Ray
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
> http://learn.perl.org/
>
>
>

--0016368320ee8e084204a199ab99--

Re: Nature of this list

--0015174734309beafe04a199c2cd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Lali wrote:

> I agree with you Ray, a nasty reply in a professional setting is easy to
> fend with a well thought answer.
> Having a thick skin, what does that mean? I don't run and throw myself o=
n
> my bed and cry my eyes out when I get a harsh critique, but I won't lie a=
nd
> say that it sits well on me right away, after the bad feelings are sorted
> out, a harsh critique usually motivates me to be better. But it has to be=
a
> harsh critique with substance, and those are usually the ones that hurt t=
he
> most, if you are convinced you have done a good job, or if you are not aw=
are
> you made a mistake, an omission or something of the sorts. On the other
> hand, an empty nasty comment really doesn't help anyone, specially a
> beginner. But maybe I am a little inexperienced, I have never received a
> nasty review for any of my articles, but I did have a particularly nasty
> supervisor, and I did speak out and it did have consequences for me, far
> more serious than getting an article rejected.
>
> L
>
> Lali,

To me a "thick skin" is learning to distance yourself from your work and it
took me a really long time to learn how to do it. It is to step back and se=
e
harsh criticism for what it is, it is an attack, substantiated or not on th=
e
work, not on you. Whatever anyone says about what you do, is not a final
judgment not on you not on your work. Step back, take what you can, learn
what you can and move on. I think it will keep you sane, but take care not
to become jaded and if you don't enjoy hard criticism, try really hard not
to it yourself. In that way, maybe one day soon, we won't need thich skins.

Cheers,

T.


--=20
"Education is not to be used to promote obscurantism." - Theodonius
Dobzhansky.

"Gracias a la vida que me ha dado tanto
Me ha dado el sonido y el abecedario
Con =E9l, las palabras que pienso y declaro
Madre, amigo, hermano
Y luz alumbrando la ruta del alma del que estoy amando

Gracias a la vida que me ha dado tanto
Me ha dado la marcha de mis pies cansados
Con ellos anduve ciudades y charcos
Playas y desiertos, monta=F1as y llanos
Y la casa tuya, tu calle y tu patio"

Violeta Parra - Gracias a la Vida

Tiago S. F. Hori
PhD Candidate - Ocean Science Center-Memorial University of Newfoundland

--0015174734309beafe04a199c2cd--

Re: Nature of this list

On Apr 23, 2011, at 10:01 AM, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:

> I just realized something this morning. If
> you go back through my "complaints" here and elsewhere over the years,
> they fall into two main camps:
>=20
> (1) people who answer someone else's question badly

[snip]

This raises for me the question, "who may submit *answers* on this =
list?" =20

It's my perception that most of protracted flaming is among the =
answerers. The asker (such as Jyotishmaan Ray in the 2009 thread Ian =
and Randal refer to, =
http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.beginners/2009/08/msg108 616.html) =
often disappears from the thread and is forgotten entirely, as the =
"expert" debate rages on.

I've read the list FAQ, and the links that Casey provided recently, and =
couldn't find an answer to this question.

Chap=

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

--00032555a726c89e1504a19a969b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Please people. I urge you all to kindly fuck off.

This is getting ridiculous. You are arguing about *tone*. Who gives a flying
fuck about tone if the post has substance? Are we fucking two? Are our egos
so fragile that we can't take the slightest of drubbings? So sensitive that
a word in caps can start this kind of shitstorm?

(Apparently yes, but bear with me for a sec)

Tone trolls, the lot of you. Yes, being nice is fine and all, and it's a
beginners list, so handholding should be the aim. And rudeness for rudeness
sake is utterly counterproductive. But I've been on this list for a while
now, and I can't recall a single instance of someone being rude when
replying a question.

....I'll be the first to admit that my memory is crap, but nevertheless,
until someone has provided links to substantiate these claims, please drop
the strawman.

On the topic of tone, if an error is so egregious that it must be corrected,
strong language sometimes is needed to drive the point. Personally, I still
wouldn't condone that kind terseness... When directly answering the
beginner. But answers themselves? That's an entirely different domain. By
answering, you are claiming to be an expert; As an expert, you are opening
your answer and code to full scrutiny.
If you choose to be the kind of teacher who will always answer with a smile
and kindly nudge people into enlightenment, good for you. But spare the rest
of us of the lecture. You'll find that not wasting your time trying to
control how others communicate can be quite freeing. :)

(A side note for Tiago and Lali and any other PhD student and/or scientist
out there: Just mention your situation and you are assured, to the best of
my ability, a hand-holding reply from me. Which may turn out to be
respectful silence as I'm not an expert, but well. I have a soft spot for
science, which can probably be "traced back to a math or science teacher"
(or blogger) that I appreciate :p)

Brian.

--00032555a726c89e1504a19a969b--

Re: Nature of this list

The F-bomb is totally unnecessary. Such language is for teenagers who =
do not yet know how to communicate displeasure effectively. Please grow =
up.
Personally, I am finding this discussion fascinating. I have often =
wondered why the "academics" at IBM would attack each other's =
presentations. It appears that part of the process of getting a PhD is =
learning to give and take intense attacks. This discussion is most =
enlightening.
Marilyn
On Apr 23, 2011, at 12:00 PM, Brian Fraser wrote:

> Please people. I urge you all to kindly fuck off.
>=20
> This is getting ridiculous. You are arguing about *tone*. Who gives a =
flying
> fuck about tone if the post has substance? Are we fucking two? Are our =
egos
> so fragile that we can't take the slightest of drubbings? So sensitive =
that
> a word in caps can start this kind of shitstorm?
>=20
> (Apparently yes, but bear with me for a sec)
>=20
> Tone trolls, the lot of you. Yes, being nice is fine and all, and it's =
a
> beginners list, so handholding should be the aim. And rudeness for =
rudeness
> sake is utterly counterproductive. But I've been on this list for a =
while
> now, and I can't recall a single instance of someone being rude when
> replying a question.
>=20
> ...I'll be the first to admit that my memory is crap, but =
nevertheless,
> until someone has provided links to substantiate these claims, please =
drop
> the strawman.
>=20
> On the topic of tone, if an error is so egregious that it must be =
corrected,
> strong language sometimes is needed to drive the point. Personally, I =
still
> wouldn't condone that kind terseness... When directly answering the
> beginner. But answers themselves? That's an entirely different domain. =
By
> answering, you are claiming to be an expert; As an expert, you are =
opening
> your answer and code to full scrutiny.
> If you choose to be the kind of teacher who will always answer with a =
smile
> and kindly nudge people into enlightenment, good for you. But spare =
the rest
> of us of the lecture. You'll find that not wasting your time trying to
> control how others communicate can be quite freeing. :)
>=20
> (A side note for Tiago and Lali and any other PhD student and/or =
scientist
> out there: Just mention your situation and you are assured, to the =
best of
> my ability, a hand-holding reply from me. Which may turn out to be
> respectful silence as I'm not an expert, but well. I have a soft spot =
for
> science, which can probably be "traced back to a math or science =
teacher"
> (or blogger) that I appreciate :p)
>=20
> Brian.


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

--0015175cd8d23f0cb404a19ae4f1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Marilyn Sander, Ken Armstrong <
marilyn-sander@earthlink.net> wrote:

> The F-bomb is totally unnecessary. Such language is for teenagers who do
> not yet know how to communicate displeasure effectively. Please grow up.
> Personally, I am finding this discussion fascinating. I have often
> wondered why the "academics" at IBM would attack each other's presentations.
> It appears that part of the process of getting a PhD is learning to give
> and take intense attacks. This discussion is most enlightening.
> Marilyn
>
> "There ought to be a room in every house to swear in. It's dangerous to
have to repress an emotion like that." Mark Twain.

It's part of the language, whenever you like it or not. Again, please look
beyond the tone and see the substance of the psot - The swearing was there
exactly to demonstrate that a few strong words shouldn't matter in your
appreciation of a message.

I guess that misfired, though.

Brian.

--0015175cd8d23f0cb404a19ae4f1--

Re: Nature of this list

Hi Brian, and all.

please read my entire response.

On Saturday 23 Apr 2011 22:22:13 Brian Fraser wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Marilyn Sander, Ken Armstrong <
>
> marilyn-sander@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > The F-bomb is totally unnecessary. Such language is for teenagers who do
> > not yet know how to communicate displeasure effectively. Please grow up.
> > Personally, I am finding this discussion fascinating. I have often
> > wondered why the "academics" at IBM would attack each other's
> > presentations.
> >
> > It appears that part of the process of getting a PhD is learning to give
> >
> > and take intense attacks. This discussion is most enlightening.
> > Marilyn
> >
> "There ought to be a room in every house to swear in. It's dangerous to
> have to repress an emotion like that." Mark Twain.
>

Well, there's a difference between repressing emotion (which is saying "No! I
am not feeling this way now") and realising you're feeling something and
acting in a rational manner in accordance or opposite the emotion. I many
times was frustrated at open source software applications having annoying bugs
and thought with many F-words and curse words, but when phrasing the bug
report, I phrased it politely, rationally, and factually (not always though,
of course).

Emotions are nature's guidelines, and should not be repressed, and one should
not feel guilty for feeling anything (Sermon on the Mount/etc. put aside),
including not a desire for murder and mayhem. But acting based on these
emotions by words or deed may not be a good idea.

You could have phrased yourself more calmly.

> It's part of the language, whenever you like it or not. Again, please look
> beyond the tone and see the substance of the psot - The swearing was there
> exactly to demonstrate that a few strong words shouldn't matter in your
> appreciation of a message.
>
> I guess that misfired, though.
>

One thing I agree is that this meta-discussion reduces the
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal-to-noise_ratio of beginners@perl.org ,
because it is of little interest to people seeking help with Perl or those
wanting to help them. As a result, I suggest moving it to advocacy@perl.org
(or maybe beginners-cafe@perl.org or possibly perl-cafe@perl.org , if Ask and
friends will be kind enough to set it up (modelled after the haskell-cafe
concept, where discussions are moved from the main haskell mailing list).
Anyone can send an email to advocacy@perl.org , even if they are not
subscribed and everyone can subscribe to it by sending an email to
advocacy-subscribe@perl.org . Anyway, it was a good place to discuss social
issues in the past, and it's very quiet now so I don't think people will mind
the action.

So pleaase subscribe to advocacy@perl.org and de-CC beginners@perl.org .

Regards,

Shlomi Fish

--
------------------------------------------------------------ -----
Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/
Funny Anti-Terrorism Story - http://shlom.in/enemy

Wikipedia has a page about everything including the
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitchen_sink .

Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On 11-04-23 06:37 PM, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> Emotions are nature's guidelines, and should not be repressed, and one should
> not feel guilty for feeling anything (Sermon on the Mount/etc. put aside),
> including not a desire for murder and mayhem. But acting based on these
> emotions by words or deed may not be a good idea.

Yes but the internet is forever. The words are still attached to your
name long after the emotions have ebbed. Be careful what you post. :)


--
Just my 0.00000002 million dollars worth,
Shawn

Confusion is the first step of understanding.

Programming is as much about organization and communication
as it is about coding.

The secret to great software: Fail early & often.

Eliminate software piracy: use only FLOSS.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

Hi Shawn,

moving to advocacy@perl.org .

On Saturday 23 Apr 2011 20:24:36 Shawn H Corey wrote:
> On 11-04-23 12:53 PM, Casey West wrote:
> > 1. What did you do that doesn=92t fit with our Lincoln School Rules? (Be
> > specific and start with =93I=94)
>=20
> Wow. The very first thing they have to think about is their contempt
> for the school authorities and not their victims' feelings. No wonder
> why they tought they could get away with it. All they had to do is hide
> their actions from the authorities. You know, there's something a
> little bit sick about a society that insists that the authorities are
> the only ones capable of deciding right and wrong.

As an Objectivist (both a Randian, and in the meaning of believing that=20
absolute Ethics and a shared, objective, reality exist), I agree with such=
=20
sentiments. The whole "a criminal is someone who violates the law" is quite=
=20
contemptible, and it is my opinion that a criminal is only someone who did=
=20
something that is wrong according to the absolute, objective, Ethics is a=20
criminal. A person who violated the law and was convicted as such is a=20
"felon", but not necessarily a criminal, and we can recall many past heroes=
=20
who were prosecuted by things that we now consider as non-crimes, and it's =
not=20
unlikely that many innocent men still get prosecuted as such.

I think explaining the difference between Laws/Regulations/Rules, Ethos,=20
Morality, etc. to schoolchildren is too big of an undertaking. (I had a=20
problem explaining the difference between "Ethical" and "Moral" to a very=20
bright and intelligent programmer, with a smaller amount of intuition and=20
knowledge than I do in Philosophy.), so imagine doing it for school childre=
n.=20
Still I think this question could be demoted because the rules is not the=20
worst thing that they could violate, nor should these children be instructe=
d=20
to blindly accept the rules, or not challenge them (without rebelling or=20
violating them knowingly). See:

http://www.paulgraham.com/gba.html

Regards,

Shlomi Fish

=2D-=20
=2D--------------------------------------------------------- -------
Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/
Original Riddles - http://www.shlomifish.org/puzzles/

Dax: yep, space. Nothing but nothing all around.
-- Star Trek, "We, the Living Dead" by Shlomi Fish

Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On 04/19/2011 06:26 PM, David Christensen wrote:
> So, my next question is "has the complaint resolution process broken
> down?".

It's been 4 days, and I haven't seen a reply to the above question.


Right now, per the "Beginning Perl mailing list FAQ" (FAQ) [1], this
list is controlled by "moderators".


One of the duties of the moderators is to administer justice -- to
receive complaints, to investigate, to make charges, to judge, and to
carry out punishment; all in private. There is no public trial, no jury
of peers, and no appeal.


I'm not an attorney, but any public disclosure of the proceeding makes
me think "libel". (As I understand it, "freedom of speech" is not an
legal defense for publicly denigrating people, whether or not they
"broke the rules"). And, any order for apology, goods, or services
makes me think "extortion". Satirical references to "large, yet padded,
clue-sticks" and "XQJ-37 nuclear powered pansexual roto-plooker[s]" [1]
are meaningless when it comes time for a moderator to do their work.
That said, I believe the FAQ correctly identifies two legal means for
punishment -- (1) terminating the thread and/or (2) banning the
convicted from posting to the list (with the presumed power to set the
duration of the ban according to the severity of offense). I wonder if
there are more.


In addition to existing tort laws and case precedents, criminal "Cyber
Bullying" legislation is coming into effect all around the world [2]. I
believe we can all understand the necessity of not running afoul of the
criminal justice system.


If you think about it, acting on a complaint involves risk and failure
to act on a complaint also involves risk -- it's a Catch-22 situation.
Whether they know it or not, many interests are currently at risk, and
will remain at risk, so long as this list is in operation --
complainants, witnesses, moderators, Internet Service Providers, the
Perl Foundation, and likely others.


Assuming that we want this list to continue, then we all have a stake in
understanding and mitigating the risks.


Other Internet forums, notably Slashdot, use democratic means for
dealing with undesired posts. From a technical standpoint, this
requires infrastructure not normally found on mailing lists. We're Perl
programmers, so, technically, that's not a problem. But, I don't know
if such processes have a better legal risk assessment and/or mitigation
cost.


This isn't the only mailing list on the Internet; these issues must have
been discussed elsewhere. Is there a canonical forum for discussing such?


Better yet, is there a legally-researched and vetted solution that we
can adopt?


This issue affects all perl.org mailing lists and/or web forums. Does
the Perl Foundation have legal counsel, and does he/ she/ they need to
be involved?


David

[1] http://learn.perl.org/faq/beginners.html

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyber_bullying

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 04:00, Brian Fraser wrote:
> Please people. I urge you all to kindly fuck off.
>
> This is getting ridiculous. You are arguing about *tone*. Who gives a flying
> fuck about tone if the post has substance? Are we fucking two? Are our egos
> so fragile that we can't take the slightest of drubbings? So sensitive that
> a word in caps can start this kind of shitstorm?
> (Apparently yes, but bear with me for a sec)


Honestly, replying to the thread and swearing has the opposite effect
-- one that you probably did not intend. :-)

Yes, in the interest of "Let's stop this and get back to Perl", it
might be a good idea to end this discussion. On the other hand, what
we're talking about is usually several people versus one person or one
or two well-respected people versus one person. And if we limit
ourselves to what happens to us and stand idly by when it happens to
someone else, then the "problem" doesn't get fixed. It continues, and
one day ... it happens to you. Perhaps that is the point...


> (A side note for Tiago and Lali and any other PhD student and/or scientist
> out there: Just mention your situation and you are assured, to the best of
> my ability, a hand-holding reply from me. Which may turn out to be


That's great but why should they or any PhD student or student have to
mention their situation in order to get nicer treatment? The list
says "beginners"; shouldn't that imply that most people asking
questions are probably in such a situation? (Granted, some may also
be asking for answers to their homework......)

In the latest message in this thread, David asks that we're 4 days
into this thread and no solution has come up. Just to throw something
out, what if the list was split to (say),
"beginners-to-beginners@perl.org" and "beginners-to-experts@perl.org"?
If there are moderators, then they would only have to "ensure" that
only newbies (or people who can act like a newbie :-) ) are in the
first list; they don't have to monitor each message... Maybe with
even cross-posting between the two lists disallowed...

I think message boards like stackoverflow ask people to vote on
answers; sounds like voting on the level of "bullying" would then mean
moderators are not needed...

Just something to throw out in the interest of people who are probably
tired of this thread... Like Marilyn, I find this discussion
fascinating since this happens in many aspects of life. Here in
Japan, I often see cases in the news of primary school children
bullying other primary school children (with sometimes disastrous
consequences). It's human nature from a very young age across many
cultures...but it doesn't mean that nothing can be done about it...or
maybe I'm wrong...

Ray

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

Hi David,

see below for my response.

On Sunday 24 Apr 2011 03:30:17 David Christensen wrote:
> On 04/19/2011 06:26 PM, David Christensen wrote:
> > So, my next question is "has the complaint resolution process broken
> > down?".
>
> It's been 4 days, and I haven't seen a reply to the above question.
>

Sorry for not noticing it earlier. I think you should have kept more context
for your original post, though.

>
> Right now, per the "Beginning Perl mailing list FAQ" (FAQ) [1], this
> list is controlled by "moderators".
>
>
> One of the duties of the moderators is to administer justice -- to
> receive complaints, to investigate, to make charges, to judge, and to
> carry out punishment; all in private. There is no public trial, no jury
> of peers, and no appeal.
>

Yes, and most people who are newcomers have not bothered to complain, possibly
because they did not know better. That put aside, I'd rather not start a
snowball of punishing, boycotting, etc. people from this mailing list, like is
prevalent on many IRC channels, primarily of IRC networks which don't have a
centralised ChanServ/NickServ/etc. We shouldn't make people feel uncomfortable
to comment or answer, or penalise them unneedlessly.

I also think it is a better idea to put someone who is acting in an abusive
manner on manual moderation before actually banning them.

>
> I'm not an attorney, but any public disclosure of the proceeding makes
> me think "libel". (As I understand it, "freedom of speech" is not an
> legal defense for publicly denigrating people, whether or not they
> "broke the rules").

You are right that it's not.

> And, any order for apology, goods, or services
> makes me think "extortion". Satirical references to "large, yet padded,
> clue-sticks" and "XQJ-37 nuclear powered pansexual roto-plooker[s]" [1]
> are meaningless when it comes time for a moderator to do their work.
> That said, I believe the FAQ correctly identifies two legal means for
> punishment -- (1) terminating the thread and/or (2) banning the
> convicted from posting to the list (with the presumed power to set the
> duration of the ban according to the severity of offense). I wonder if
> there are more.

I also suggest adding keeping someone in moderation, with the ability to reply
and correct their posts. This is less harsher than banning. I think ezmlm-idx
should be able to do it, and maybe we can move to something more actively
maintained and modern such as http://www.sympa.org/ . I have made a gradual
transition on @iglu.org.il from ezmlm-idx to Sympa in the past, which worked
pretty well, albeit the machine was underpowered which made keeping MySQL
alive unusable. Now @hamakor.org.il which succeeded @iglu.org.il is using GNU
Mailman, which has been less actively maintained than Sympa, but is also
pretty decent (though it has a very confusing set of admin screens.).

>
>
> In addition to existing tort laws and case precedents, criminal "Cyber
> Bullying" legislation is coming into effect all around the world [2]. I
> believe we can all understand the necessity of not running afoul of the
> criminal justice system.

Well, online bullying is a problem, but I don't think that saying "Your Perl
code sucks" or "Please don't post misleaing answers to people's Perl
questions" would qualify as online bullying. Of course, it's up to the judges
to decide, and given the poor phrasing of many such laws, it is likely that
this may make you effectively guilty. See for example:

http://www.lightlink.com/spacenka/fors/ ("State of Oregon vs Randal
Schwartz").

The way I see it, "Cyberbulling" is much more persistent than just making one
comment on a post to a public mailing list. I'm not saying being rude is a
good thing to do, but it's still not as bad as online bullying.

>
>
> If you think about it, acting on a complaint involves risk and failure
> to act on a complaint also involves risk -- it's a Catch-22 situation.
> Whether they know it or not, many interests are currently at risk, and
> will remain at risk, so long as this list is in operation --
> complainants, witnesses, moderators, Internet Service Providers, the
> Perl Foundation, and likely others.
>
>
> Assuming that we want this list to continue, then we all have a stake in
> understanding and mitigating the risks.
>
>
> Other Internet forums, notably Slashdot, use democratic means for
> dealing with undesired posts. From a technical standpoint, this
> requires infrastructure not normally found on mailing lists. We're Perl
> programmers, so, technically, that's not a problem. But, I don't know
> if such processes have a better legal risk assessment and/or mitigation
> cost.

I don't suggest turning beginners@perl.org into something voted and deomcratic
like Slashdot.org, Stackoverflow.com or perlmonks.org . I think that voting
things up (and especially down) would be demotivating, and would yield to a
lot of karma wars and whoring. We should be an open forum where people gain
esteem by helping other people in a nice way, and the manners in which they
are manifested are by saying "thanks" etc. I'm not saying democratic forums
don't have their place (some people seem to enjoy them, and I got some help
from Stackoverflow.com in the past, and naturally, when some of my (and
others) online features were successfully Slashdotted, it was a huge boost of
traffic, esteem and commentary.), but if you want a democratic forum for Perl,
you can use http://stackoverflow.com/ which is more suited for that, and we
should keep this mailing list with an implicit karma and not an explicit one.

>
>
> This isn't the only mailing list on the Internet; these issues must have
> been discussed elsewhere. Is there a canonical forum for discussing such?
>

Maybe a meta-mailing list mailing list? ;-) Well, these issues were discussed
in Usenet for a long time before mailing lists were popular (which were
considered a novelty back then). Also see:

http://www.shlomifish.org/philosophy/computers/web/online-co mmunities/

>
> Better yet, is there a legally-researched and vetted solution that we
> can adopt?

We can put some measures, but I think it's also useful to do a proper
discussion and convincing in written English, without having any authority or
"power". And like I said, I've been on this list for a few years, and don't
think I have ever seen any public form of cyberbullying (though maybe some
people did it to other members of this list in private and if so, should
report it to the @perl.org admins.).

We can also more stuff to the list with addresses to contact upon abuse. This
seems like a good idea to me.

>
>
> This issue affects all perl.org mailing lists and/or web forums. Does
> the Perl Foundation have legal counsel, and does he/ she/ they need to
> be involved?

Let's not lose our senses here. I don't think we are at risk of being accused
of online bullying, at least not on our public forums. (I don't think I have
ever seen a case of it on a @perl.org mailing list.). I don't rule out that
people have been bullying other people in private, but what Randal or Uri or
whoever do is not bullying, and my classmates and I have said much worse
things to each other back in preschool. Reportedly the Academia is filled with
people criticising each other works, and as opposed to most software hackers,
they also sometimes say that people are horrible professionals, as a way of
gaining esteem, and they are not at a risk of considered as "bullying".

I'm not saying the social anti-patterns that this thread discusses are
desirable, and I certainly would like to see them reduced to a minimum, just
that they should be taken into proportion regarding their legal-context (and
naturally ethical context - they are not a crime.).

Sorry for writing such a long message.

Regards,

Shlomi Fish

>
>
> David
>
> [1] http://learn.perl.org/faq/beginners.html
>
> [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyber_bullying

--
------------------------------------------------------------ -----
Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/
Best Introductory Programming Language - http://shlom.in/intro-lang

Mastering 'cat' is almost as difficult as herding cats.
-- http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/Mastering-Cat/

Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On 04/24/2011 02:36 AM, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> I also think it is a better idea to put someone who is acting in an abusive
> manner on manual moderation before actually banning them.

Good idea. Does the beginners@perl.org mailing list software have this
feature?


> Well, online bullying is a problem, but I don't think that saying "Your Perl
> code sucks" or "Please don't post misleaing answers to people's Perl
> questions" would qualify as online bullying.

I once sat on a jury for a criminal case involving a bum who ran from
the police, fought back with a metal rod while being "arrested"
(attacked) by a K-9 unit, and ended up breaking a cop's finger. The bum
was charged with (1) resisting, delaying, or obstructing a peace
officer, (2) assault, (3) battery, (4) battery with grievous bodily
injury, (5) battery on a peace officer, and (6) battery on a peace
office with grievous bodily injury. He was looking at 10+ years in
prison and convicted felon status for the rest of his life. Most of the
charges hinged upon the concept of "intent" -- could the prosecution
prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant intended to hit the
cop, or was the cop's hand merely in the wrong place at the wrong time?
A second key concept was this: the judge gave us explicit
instructions that we were to decide questions of fact and guilt per the
definitions in the law, nothing else. We were *not* to weight the crime
against the punishment. It was a real eye-opener for me.


The point is this: some crimes hinge upon what's going on inside
someone's head. What may not qualify as "bullying" to you may qualify
for someone else. And, if that someone else files a complaint with the
relevant law enforcement agencies, life could get very unpleasant for
people connect to this list. Regardless of what happens or does not
happen under the criminal justice system, the victim also has rights
under civil law. Do you remember O. J. Simpson?


> The way I see it, "Cyberbulling" is much more persistent than just making one
> comment on a post to a public mailing list.

Perhaps. Note that people on this list have already stated that certain
people have a history of questionable conduct on this list. Yet, those
same certain people are still here. I know of a workplace harassment
civil case with parallels. Counsel for the plaintiff argued that the
employer knew that a certain supervisor had a history harassing
employees, did nothing about it, and therefore shared the blame. The
strategy is to put stink on everybody until the defendant with the deep
pockets pays to settle without trial (e.g. the employer). Failing that,
counsel for the plaintiff will ask the jury for exemplary punitive
damages. That's why I said that the Perl Foundation has a stake in this.


> I don't suggest turning beginners@perl.org into something voted and deomcratic
> like Slashdot.org, Stackoverflow.com or perlmonks.org . I think that voting
> things up (and especially down) would be demotivating, and would yield to a
> lot of karma wars and whoring. We should be an open forum where people gain
> esteem by helping other people in a nice way, and the manners in which they
> are manifested are by saying "thanks" etc.

Your intentions are well and good, but what matters in court is the law
and case precedence.


> Sorry for writing such a long message.

Thank you for writing such a long message. :-)


As aside, people reading this may think twice before hitting the "Send"
button.


David

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 04:38, David Christensen
wrote:
> On 04/24/2011 02:36 AM, Shlomi Fish wrote:
>> I also think it is a better idea to put someone who is acting in an
>> abusive
>> manner on manual moderation before actually banning them.
> Good idea.  Does the beginners@perl.org mailing list software have t=
his
> feature?


I should say that I don't seem to have read any of Shlomi's posts; I'm
not sure if they were sent on the mailing list or maybe some strange
setting -- and no, I have not set a filter on Shlomi ... definitely.
:-) So, I'm writing with only the context provided by David in his
reply...


>> Well, online bullying is a problem, but I don't think that saying "Your
>> Perl
>> code sucks" or "Please don't post misleaing answers to people's Perl
>> questions" would qualify as online bullying.
....
> The point is this:  some crimes hinge upon what's going on inside so=
meone's
> head.  What may not qualify as "bullying" to you may qualify for som=
eone
> else.  And, if that someone else files a complaint with the relevant=
law


After reading this, what came to mind is the problem of sexual and
power harassment in the workplace, and maybe extending to other types
of prejudices but maybe that is a stretch? Often, the person being
accused might start with, "I was just kidding" or "Hey! Both of us
weren't taking it seriously!" but sometimes that isn't the case. I'm
tempted to say that whether or not it is harassment should depend on
how the object of the action felt...

But another point is that if workplaces can't sort this problem out
and neither do the law courts, then there is no real expectation for a
Perl mailing list (of beginners, too! :-) ) would come up with a
solution...


>> I don't suggest turning beginners@perl.org into something voted and
>> deomcratic
>> like Slashdot.org, Stackoverflow.com or perlmonks.org . I think that
>> voting
>> things up (and especially down) would be demotivating, and would yield t=
o


Well, this is a public mailing list. Stackoverflow, etc. are web
sites with some kind of user id/password control.

I think the question we should ask is if such actions is detrimental
to the list. Does it turn away people who are asking questions who
may some day answer someone else's questions? Does it turn away
people who maybe are newbies, but years later could be great Perl
programmers if it weren't for one or two people stepping on them.
Instead, they ended up being great Python/Ruby programmers...which
would be good for these languages, though...

Anyway, my "create another list" suggestion wasn't an idea based on
*exclusion*. Having another list for newbies doesn't prevent this
list from existing, for example. In any case, it's just an idea and
if the powers-that-be don't take a bite, then it'll disappear back to
where it came from. :-)

An interesting story that perhaps a few of you not in Japan have heard
(and sensationalized) about in Japan is the sexual harassment on
trains. The solution for the train companies was to create a "women
only" car (yes, the harassment was usually men --> women) near the
conductor's seat. It didn't mean that women couldn't go to any of the
other cars; and the remaining cars was sufficient for the number of
male passengers. But the interesting thing was that in a few
publicized incidents, a male-female couple would entrap an innocent
male whereby the woman would play the victim and her companion would
be the witness who "has never met the woman in his life". So, some
men actually liked the idea of such a car because they could ride the
train with maybe a less chance of being accused [yes, this statement
is not quite true.].

Ray

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

From: Raymond Wan
> >> Well, online bullying is a problem, but I don't think that saying "Yo=
ur
> >> Perl
> >> code sucks" or "Please don't post misleaing answers to people's Perl
> >> questions" would qualify as online bullying.
> ...
> > The point is this: =A0some crimes hinge upon what's going on inside so=
meone's
> > head. =A0What may not qualify as "bullying" to you may qualify for som=
eone
> > else. =A0And, if that someone else files a complaint with the relevant=
law
>
>
> After reading this, what came to mind is the problem of sexual and
> power harassment in the workplace, and maybe extending to other types
> of prejudices but maybe that is a stretch? Often, the person being
> accused might start with, "I was just kidding" or "Hey! Both of us
> weren't taking it seriously!" but sometimes that isn't the case. I'm
> tempted to say that whether or not it is harassment should depend on
> how the object of the action felt...

The catch is that this basically means that: it's a crime whenever
it's convenient for the "victim". In some cases even just whenever
it's convenient for a lawyer that happens to come by. Where there's
money to be sued out, there's a crime.

> I think the question we should ask is if such actions is detrimental
> to the list. Does it turn away people who are asking questions who
> may some day answer someone else's questions? Does it turn away
> people who maybe are newbies, but years later could be great Perl
> programmers if it weren't for one or two people stepping on them.
> Instead, they ended up being great Python/Ruby programmers...which
> would be good for these languages, though...

The people that are likely to ever give anything back to the
community are much less likely to receive harsh treatment, than those
that mistake the list for a free script writing service.

Of course those that are starting to give advice on the list run the
risk of having their advice dissected and in some cases corrected.
And then there are three kinds of people. Those that take that as an
oportunity to learn, those that misunderstand the critique and take
it personally and those that take that as an oportunity to feel
offended.

The first kind will learn, the second will eventually learn as well
.... and the last ... would do better to complain somewhere they can
actually extort some money.

Shame is the last kind tends to start a flamewar even if it was not
their code being criticized.

Jenda

=====3D Jenda@Krynicky.cz ===3D http://Jenda.Krynicky.cz ===
===3D
When it comes to wine, women and song, wizards are allowed
to get drunk and croon as much as they like.
-- Terry Pratchett in Sourcery


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

2011/4/25 Jenda Krynicky :
> From: Raymond Wan
>> After reading this, what came to mind is the problem of sexual and
>> power harassment in the workplace, and maybe extending to other types
>> of prejudices but maybe that is a stretch?  Often, the person being
>> accused might start with, "I was just kidding" or "Hey!  Both of us
>> weren't taking it seriously!" but sometimes that isn't the case.  I=
'm
>> tempted to say that whether or not it is harassment should depend on
>> how the object of the action felt...
>
> The catch is that this basically means that: it's a crime whenever
> it's convenient for the "victim". In some cases even just whenever
> it's convenient for a lawyer that happens to come by. Where there's
> money to be sued out, there's a crime.


Yes, you are right. In the case of this list, there is (AFAIK) no
gain for any victim to be a victim so we can safely assume the victims
are victims, right?

But yes, in my example, money is involved and that makes things a bit diffi=
cult.


> The people that are likely to ever give anything back to the
> community are much less likely to receive harsh treatment, than those
> that mistake the list for a free script writing service.
>
> Of course those that are starting to give advice on the list run the
> risk of having their advice dissected and in some cases corrected.


Well, from what I've seen, the people that are being put down are not
the ones that post their homework once but have been around for a few
months and thought it was time to help someone out. The people that
think it's a free script writing service will just as easily create
another free e-mail account and come back...


> And then there are three kinds of people. Those that take that as an
> oportunity to learn, those that misunderstand the critique and take
> it personally and those that take that as an oportunity to feel
> offended.
>
> The first kind will learn, the second will eventually learn as well
> ... and the last ... would do better to complain somewhere they can
> actually extort some money.


Hmmmmm, sounds like you think that if the problem is ignored, it will go aw=
ay?

Well, in a way, you might be right. Whether there is bullying at the
workplace or at school, ultimately...if we look at the "long run", the
staff will quit or the student will graduate. And then the problem
becomes someone else's problem. I guess that's how things like this
are usually handled. A bit unfortunate...

Ray

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

From: Raymond Wan
> 2011/4/25 Jenda Krynicky :
> > From: Raymond Wan
> >> After reading this, what came to mind is the problem of sexual and
> >> power harassment in the workplace, and maybe extending to other types
> >> of prejudices but maybe that is a stretch? =A0Often, the person being
> >> accused might start with, "I was just kidding" or "Hey! =A0Both of us
> >> weren't taking it seriously!" but sometimes that isn't the case. =A0I=
'm
> >> tempted to say that whether or not it is harassment should depend on
> >> how the object of the action felt...
> >
> > The catch is that this basically means that: it's a crime whenever
> > it's convenient for the "victim". In some cases even just whenever
> > it's convenient for a lawyer that happens to come by. Where there's
> > money to be sued out, there's a crime.
>
>
> Yes, you are right. In the case of this list, there is (AFAIK) no
> gain for any victim to be a victim so we can safely assume the victims
> are victims, right?

Nope. Not all gains are monetary.

> > The people that are likely to ever give anything back to the
> > community are much less likely to receive harsh treatment, than those
> > that mistake the list for a free script writing service.
> >
> > Of course those that are starting to give advice on the list run the
> > risk of having their advice dissected and in some cases corrected.
>
>
> Well, from what I've seen, the people that are being put down are not
> the ones that post their homework once but have been around for a few
> months and thought it was time to help someone out.

The misunderstanding is that these people are not put down. Their
answers (sometimes) are. And if they decide to take the critique of
their code personaly then no amount of sweet words will help.

> > And then there are three kinds of people. Those that take that as an
> > oportunity to learn, those that misunderstand the critique and take
> > it personally and those that take that as an oportunity to feel
> > offended.
> >
> > The first kind will learn, the second will eventually learn as well
> > ... and the last ... would do better to complain somewhere they can
> > actually extort some money.
>
>
> Hmmmmm, sounds like you think that if the problem is ignored, it will go=
away?

Some problems are real, some imaginary. The later kind is better
ignored.

Jenda
=====3D Jenda@Krynicky.cz ===3D http://Jenda.Krynicky.cz ===
===3D
When it comes to wine, women and song, wizards are allowed
to get drunk and croon as much as they like.
-- Terry Pratchett in Sourcery


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

On 4/24/2011 12:38 PM, David Christensen wrote:
>
>> The way I see it, "Cyberbulling" is much more persistent than just
>> making one
>> comment on a post to a public mailing list.
>
> Perhaps. Note that people on this list have already stated that certain
> people have a history of questionable conduct on this list. Yet, those
> same certain people are still here. I know of a workplace harassment
> civil case with parallels. Counsel for the plaintiff argued that the
> employer knew that a certain supervisor had a history harassing
> employees, did nothing about it, and therefore shared the blame. The
> strategy is to put stink on everybody until the defendant with the deep
> pockets pays to settle without trial (e.g. the employer). Failing that,
> counsel for the plaintiff will ask the jury for exemplary punitive
> damages. That's why I said that the Perl Foundation has a stake in this.
>

Maybe maybe not. What you are saying is very common among people with
a US-centric view of the world. You believe that your legal system
applies globally when it does not (thankfully)

For law enforcement to get involved in "cyberbullying" on the Perl
mailing list would mean that both the perp and victim would need to
reside in a jurisdiction that the law enforcement agency had any
authority over.

That is why most of these attempts to use legal strategy on a public
mailing list are pretty pointless.

>
> Your intentions are well and good, but what matters in court is the law
> and case precedence.
>

And what matters is if that court has jurisdiction over me. The Sharia
Court of Iran can pronounce me a heretic all it wants but I live in
the US and my jurisdiction will not honor an extradition request from
them.

>
> As aside, people reading this may think twice before hitting the "Send"
> button.
>

As long as they aren't slandering, Reno vs ACLU pretty much gives
people in the US the protection to say anything they want. And it is
legally impossible in the US to slander an idea.

Ted

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

Re: Nature of this list

Hi Jenda,


2011/4/26 Jenda Krynicky :
> From: Raymond Wan
>> Hmmmmm, sounds like you think that if the problem is ignored, it will go away?
>
> Some problems are real, some imaginary. The later kind is better
> ignored.


Yes...well, I would think whether or not it is imaginary should not be
based on us not really feel like being bothered with it. :-)

In any case, it might require more momentum for anything to be done
here... At least it was discussed a bit longer, which was better than
2 years ago... :-)

Ray

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscribe@perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help@perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/