On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:33 PM, Brian F. Yulga <byu...@langly.dyndns.org> 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. </wall> -- Brandon McCaig <http://www.bamccaig.com/> <bamcc...@gmail.com> V zrna gur orfg jvgu jung V fnl. Vg qbrfa'g nyjnlf fbhaq gung jnl. Castopulence Software <http://www.castopulence.org/> <bamcc...@castopulence.org> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscr...@perl.org For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-h...@perl.org http://learn.perl.org/
