On 12 Aug, 14:08, Steven D'Aprano <st...@remove-this- cybersource.com.au> wrote: > > With tens of millions of web users, it's no surprise that Wikipedia can > attract thousands of editors. But this does not apply to Python, which > starts from a comparatively tiny population, primarily those interested > in Python. Have a look at the Wikipedia page for Python.
What does the Python entry on Wikipedia have to do with editing the Python documentation in a Wiki? Once everyone has agreed that the description of Python on Wikipedia is reasonable, there's not much point in editing it, is there? In contrast, there's a continuous stream of people who don't think Python's documentation is that great. [...] > > A free-for-all isn't likely to be the best solution for more actively > > edited Python documentation, but Wiki solutions undeniably provide a > > superior "fast path" for edits by trusted users to be incorporated and > > published in accessible end-user documentation. > > And the Python time-machine strikes again: > > http://wiki.python.org/moin/ And I suggested that the complainants use it as a starting point. [...] > Oh dear me. You mean that they don't agree that YOUR time is more > important than theirs??? What horrible people they must be, to expect you > to sacrifice some of your sleep time just so *they* can get some sleep > themselves!!! Who do they think they are??? That's quite an attempt to make my position more extreme than it actually is. I get people asking me to improve my own software, you know, and even if I don't have the time or inclination to do what they ask, I do spend time discussing it with them. Such people, including myself when I'm on the other side of the fence, appreciate more than just a brush-off and no: they don't insist that their own time be valued above anyone else's (as you would have me misrepresented); they just ask that their own efforts aren't treated as having no value because they're not part of the "elite" development team. You get various projects doing soul-searching about embracing the efforts of non-programmers, and the first port of call on that particular voyage is to not treat them like idiot consumers whose remarks can only be considered as mere heckling while the visionaries act out their flawless production. Paul P.S. The mention of "social problems" ties in with other remarks made recently, and I've increasingly found it more trouble than has been worthwhile to pursue Python-related matters of late. When one tries to encourage people to participate in improving various things, which usually means the community having to accept a degree of criticism, people claim that it's encouraging "undesirable" influences to point such critics in the right direction instead of showing them the door. When one tries to pursue such improvement matters oneself, people always have something to say about the choice of technology or whether they like the particular background colour being used or indeed have an opinion, typically shallow and negative, about anything but the task at hand, and there'll always be someone queuing up to dismantle anything that does get done at the first opportunity. In contrast, I've found other groups of people to be grateful for even modest technical assistance, and I know that such people are much more likely to get my support and input in the future than those who think that it's some kind of advantage to have potential contributors run the gauntlet of denial (that there are structural problems in their project), skepticism (that newcomers can have anything to contribute), discouragement (because any solution which doesn't validate someone's technology preferences must be criticised) and, indeed, outright hostility. One can always spend one's time doing something which isn't 100% enjoyable or 100% rewarding if one feels that the time is still being spent on something worthwhile. I'm getting the feeling that lots of Python-related stuff doesn't quite satisfy such criteria any more. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list