Does Perl has a code hider
nick at ccl4.org
Fri Sep 18 11:32:23 BST 2009
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:22:59AM +0100, Michael Lush wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Sep 2009, Sue Spence wrote:
> >2009/9/17 Jacqui Caren <jacqui.caren at ntlworld.com>
> >>Robert Shiels wrote:
> >>>Don't really want my mbox file filling up with them.
> >>I dont mind doing reviews and the idea of a FAQ review
> >>is a good one but trying to "push me" will not work.
> >>I think the idea would have been shot down if I suggested posting
> >>three or more FAQs to here every week.
> >>Why not post (a different) one a month to lost of .pm lists?
> >>Once a month is tolerable. Three a week when perlfaq is a command
> >>on almost every server I have access to is ... words fail me.
> >Almost everyone is being wildly tolerant of this idea. I'm not fond of it
> >myself, though. Not when could be done in a separate list for those who
> >would like to see perlfaqs in their mailbox. Social discussion lists
> >shouldn't have automated posting directed to them.
> Would it be more 'interesting'/tolarable if a random monthly 'faqbite'
> was posted. I'd be inclined to read a single answer out of curiosity,
> I'd simply ignore the whole thing.
I'm going to stick my neck out.
I don't want *random*
Automated regular mailing of a random FAQ entry is spam.
If someone cares to pick an *interesting* FAQ entry every so often, and mail
it, *along with* some comments to prompt discussion, that's different.
That has a human behind it, and is far more likely to actually engage people.
"Oh it's easy to filter" is analogous to "just hit delete" on spam, and
opt-out mailing lists.
If people would really like an automatic thrice-weekly FAQ fettling list,
then people are welcome to set one up and advertise its existence to this
More information about the london.pm