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, 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
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.

--
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/

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

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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

>>>>> "Rob" == Rob Dixon <rob.dixon [at] gmx.com> 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 5373 where I brought this up with
respect to monks.

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<merlyn [at] stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion

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

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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

On 19/04/2011 21:31, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> "Rob" == Rob Dixon<rob.dixon [at] gmx.com> 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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

>>>>> "Rob" == Rob Dixon <rob.dixon [at] gmx.com> 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
<merlyn [at] stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion

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

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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

>>>>> "Shawn" == Shawn H Corey <shawnhcorey [at] ncf.ca> 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
<merlyn [at] stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion

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

On 2011-04-19 18:01:38 -0400, Rob Dixon said:
>
> 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! =
:)

--
Robert



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

>>>>> "Robert" == Robert <sigzero [at] gmail.com> 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
<merlyn [at] stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion

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

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 [at] 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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:33 PM, Brian F. Yulga
<byulga [at] langly.dyndns.org> wrote:
> The first time I ventured some guesses in unknown territory, I
> got struck down pretty fast. =C2=A0It 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. =C2=A0But, I have accepted it
> almost like a "Perl initiation" trial. =C2=A0I 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.
>=C2=A0It 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.

</wall>


-- Brandon McCaig <http://www.bamccaig.com/> <bamccaig [at] gmail.com>
V zrna gur orfg jvgu jung V fnl. Vg qbrfa'g nyjnlf fbhaq gung
jnl. Castopulence Software <http://www.castopulence.org/>
<bamccaig [at] castopulence.org>

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

On Apr 19, 2011, at 11:17 AM, 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 =
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. [...] 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's useful information to have, and I'll adjust my own expectations =
accordingly.

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.

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.

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 [at] 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.

Chap



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

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 11:38 PM, Chap Harrison <clh [at] pobox.com>
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 <http://www.bamccaig.com/> <bamccaig [at] gmail.com>
V zrna gur orfg jvgu jung V fnl. Vg qbrfa'g nyjnlf fbhaq gung jnl.
Castopulence Software <http://www.castopulence.org/> <bamccaig [at] castopulence.org>

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

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

> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 11:38 PM, Chap Harrison <clh [at] pobox.com>
> 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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 01:17, Rob Dixon <rob.dixon [at] gmx.com> 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. =C2=A0Casey 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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

On 19 April 2011 16:00, Peter Scott <Peter [at] psdt.com> 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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

On Apr 19, 6:25=A0pm, mer... [at] 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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

On Tue, April 19, 2011 12:45 pm, Raymond Wan wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 01:17, Rob Dixon <rob.dixon [at] gmx.com> 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. =C2=A0Casey 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!


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

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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

>>>>> "Rob" == Rob Dixon <rob.dixon [at] gmx.com> 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
<merlyn [at] stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion

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

On 21/04/2011 17:25, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>>>>>> "Rob" == Rob Dixon<rob.dixon [at] gmx.com> 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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 01:25, Randal L. Schwartz <merlyn [at] stonehenge.com> w=
rote:
>>>>>> "Rob" =3D=3D Rob Dixon <rob.dixon [at] gmx.com> 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". =C2=A0These past 18 months put that as a mere bump. =C2=A0If 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. =C2=A0But that requires far more interaction than a
> mailing list can provide. =C2=A0I 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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob Dixon" <rob.dixon [at] gmx.com>
To: "Randal L. Schwartz" <merlyn [at] stonehenge.com>
Cc: <beginners [at] perl.org>
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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

On Thu, April 21, 2011 1:22 pm, Raymond Wan wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 01:25, Randal L. Schwartz <merlyn [at] stonehenge.co=
m>
> wrote:
>>>>>>> "Rob" =3D=3D Rob Dixon <rob.dixon [at] gmx.com> 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". =C2=A0These past 18 months put that as a mere bump. =C2=A0If 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. =C2=A0But that requires far more interaction than =
a
>> mailing list can provide. =C2=A0I 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.


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

Hi Randal (and everybody),

On Thursday 21 Apr 2011 19:25:40 Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> >>>>> "Rob" == Rob Dixon <rob.dixon [at] gmx.com> 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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/

--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--

>>>>> "Ian" == Ian <pcs305 [at] gmail.com> 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
<merlyn [at] stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion

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

--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--

>>>>> "Ian" == Ian <pcs305 [at] gmail.com> 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
<merlyn [at] stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion

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

--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--

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

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Randal L. Schwartz
<merlyn [at] stonehenge.com>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--

--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 <pub [at] johnrefior.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Randal L. Schwartz
> <merlyn [at] stonehenge.com>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--

On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 04:56, Randal L. Schwartz <merlyn [at] stonehenge.com> w=
rote:
>>>>>> "Ian" =3D=3D Ian =C2=A0<pcs305 [at] gmail.com> 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. =C2=A0It 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 [at] perl.org
For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-help [at] perl.org
http://learn.perl.org/