On Friday 25 January 2002 18:55, Simon Cozens wrote: > On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 01:56:20PM -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote: > > If anything, it's largely our fault, for allowing, through our silence, > > Simon to speak on our behalf in those situations. > > Hey, if my speaking on behalf of Perl 6 is such a problem, someone else is > very welcome to this maintainer's hat...
"...in those situations..." If we've a concern, we can pipe up. Brevity of answer is sometimes good. Answers that provide exactly the right amount of information are better. Contextual or personality clues are often needed to decide how much is enough, which is tough to do with folks that provide neither. No one wants to read through any of my diatribes when a simple "you can find an entry here" will suffice. (This occasionally happens to me with things that have changed in recent versions of Perl. "I *have* read the manuals, and if you didn't have so many of them, I'd read them all again.") > > > Simon, (occasionally referred to as the Tom Christiansen for a New > > Generation :-) > > Heh. I'm not sure whether that's a complement or an insult. :) Smiley aside, neither. It's just commentary. Tom provides (provided?) spiciness to the Perl community. Sometimes a slap upside the head is *exactly* what's needed. (If nothing else, as refreshment to those that *do* patiently explain the Way Things Are while secretly wishing that a kill file could contain more than just email.) > But > you're right - like Tom, I'm bigly in favour of people doing their own > research before blustering in. We're not, for instance, going to be > writing parts of Parrot in C++, as a study of the FAQ (which I honestly > did not know was not very well publicised[1]) or the mailing list > archives would confirm. Suggestions that we could or ought to just > convince me that the questioner has not done his homework, and this > makes me less disposed to giving him anything more than terse answers. A perfectly valid response. I'm not saying that *you* should be more cautious in what you say and how you say it - I'm saying that the community should feel free to add their own responses if they're not happy with the phraseology of yours. After all, without "Read the FAQ", it wouldn't have become clear that the FAQ hadn't been imported yet. > > [1] Even though on the other hand, it is relatively easy to find via > Google. -- Bryan C. Warnock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
