develooper Front page | perl.beginners | Postings from August 2009

Re: A side note

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Raymond Wan
August 18, 2009 18:37
Re: A side note
Message ID:

Uri Guttman wrote:
>>>>>> "RW" == Raymond Wan <> writes:
>   RW> Well, how about this?  If A posts a question, B replies but B is "flat
>   RW> out wrong", then what if expert C replies but not to B's message, but
>   RW> to A's?  Less frustration for C and both A and B learn something
>   RW> ... and maybe C will even get two "Thank you's" for the price of
>   RW> one...  Seems more productive and less stressful than taking it out on
>   RW> B, isn't it??
> not IMO. B needs to learn the correct way and i have seen many cases
> (usenet in particular) where B replies first and suckers (sometimes B is
> a troll) A into using the bad code. and even worse A thanks B for their
> help! so you have to both followup A's original post and B's bad code.

Well, ok...this is a "special case" of a troll and that happens.  Who knows?  B 
might actually be a Ruby fan and is trying to sabotage the Perl newsgroups.  :-)

However, I don't think a troll with such a malevolent intention would admit they 
weren't an expert.  If the intention is good, B might not only thank C, but also 

I'm not saying that expert C shouldn't come down on B...I'm saying maybe coming 
down on B as the "default" is a bit harsh.  Of course, if they're trolling, then 
go for it.  :-)

>   RW> As someone who has been both A and B on _this_ very message board (C
>   RW> -- not yet :-P ), I, for one, am glad that the person C at the time
>   RW> (sorry, forgot who it was...) didn't take it out on me...
> you don't have to necessarily take it out but you do have to correct
> them. if they are genuinely trying to help that is nice but helping when
> you don't really know the best answer is an issue. this list has plenty
> of expert (of ALL levels :) so you don't have to jump in to help if you
> are even slightly unsure of yourself. that is one thing you can learn by
> lurking more which is always good for new members.

Correct them sure.  But, is it straight-forward to say that everyone seeking for 
help wants the "best answer"?  Especially with Perl when there are multiple 
answers, the best answer may be difficult to comprehend to some newbies. 
Someone at just a slightly higher level may word the answer in a way that is 

And what if A tries B's code, fails and asks again and B continues replying? 
Ok, A didn't get the "best answer" immediately; but isn't it a bad idea to stop 
such discussion?  And sure, a few mails later, B gives up and someone else steps 
in.  Is that a bad thing?  C can also do some "lurking" form time-to-time, 
right?  (NB:  I have little sympathy for people who ask a question and say "I 
have my homework due tomorrow and need the best answer now."  :-) )

Of course, we aren't going to agree on this, but if Perl can have multiple ways 
of doing things, then users of Perl surely can have multiple opinions.  :-)


Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About