On Tue, 2008-10-28 at 19:09 +0100, Salve J Nilsen wrote: > > Yes, I'd like to avoid ad hominem attacks. This is a basic part of making > any negative-feedback service into a respectable one.
> > Feel free to suggest a better title. (I won't, because I think there's a > motivational value in keeping it as it is. The day I end up on the list, > I probably won't say "meh, it's not important for my reputation".) You appear to be contradicting yourself here. There's no need for a hall of shame. As somebody has already pointed out, all one needs is for the list to be comprehensive, all-inclusive and paginated. There is a small subset of people who *might* be motivated by the CPANTS attempt to shame them. But anyone who doesn't make changes to their modules to get themselves off that list ( assuming they know about the list) is obviously unmotivated by "shame". That makes the list's necessity self-refuting. Your belief that the list is "motivational" is purely conjecture on your part. If you have some qualitative measure which tends to support the idea, I'd find it interesting. In another email on the subject, you suggested "I'd like to see a world that treats volunteers with respect, but doesn't deny them negative feedback". Classifying some module as being lower on the list of 'kwalitee' is in fact positive feedback if no negative characterizations are added. This is where I think there is some confusion. "Shame" and intending to heap it on a specific set of developers is definitely negative. A score is not negative. It is merely a score. Frankly, CPANTS is a bit juvenile in its overall execution. It needs to grow up. I would rather assume that developers who contribute modules to CPAN are adults who don't need psychological manipulation to get them to do things. They don't need to be treated like 2 year olds. (Here comes the airplane Johnny...open your mouth...vrooom!" .... "Bad Johnny! No more jumping off the bed!"). Obviously this is the case since CPAN has been around much longer than CPANTS. CPANTS could actually be quite useful, especially for those who haven't yet submitted modules or are working on modules and want to smoke them BEFORE submitting them. CPANTS looks more like a pet peeve list wrapped up in a pseudo game where "playing" results in a lose-lose for the developer. > > > - Salve >
