On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 12:13:37PM -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: > On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 05:57:51PM +0200, demerphq wrote: > > On 7/1/05, David Landgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > demerphq wrote: > > > > it is important that this is debated outside of just the perl-qa list > > > > (its not that high traffic or visibility IMO) so I have taken the > > > > liberty of starting a thread on Perlmonks about this. It is at > > > > http://perlmonks.org/index.pl?node_id=471639. > > > > > > Ohh, that'll make schwern happy :) > > > > Heh. One day hopefully Schwern will get over his apparent prejudice > > about the place. > > Though at first, I had the same thought as David, I don't think > Schwern really has shown a prejudice against perlmonks. He just > doesn't like (with good reason) bug reports going there instead of to > the module author.
It boils down to an inconsistent interface which I cannot control (and I'm lumping in all web boards here) and the "pull" problem of having to go out to N different web sites to look for conversations. Contrast this to email and mailing lists where I control my MTA interface and its "push" so everything comes to me, I don't have to go chasing it. If it was mirrored as a mailing list that would increase the probability I might pay attention to Perlmonks (or any web board). -- Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pobox.com/~schwern Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -- Phillip K. Dick
