Re^5: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section?

What problems have afflicted PerlMonks historically by the lack of an OT section and(or) the presence of OT posts in other sections?
1. The instant reaction to this: Perl Restfull call by Angular JS not working
  The Perl-relatedness is clearly defined in the OP; but still the instant reaction to the question is dismissively negative: "That's off-topic; take your silly question elsewhere."
2. All the post's that I (and many others, but I have a feel for the occurrence with my own posts) that have been prevented from reaching a wider audience, by their languishing unresolved in the consideration process -- for being off-topic; even when they weren't.
  An example of this "languishing" is your consideration of the OP of this thread. There it sits; unable to be front-paged (not that it necessarily should be; but that's not the point) despite that an 8 to 2 majority have given their verdict. (The wrong verdict in my opinion; but that's by-the-by also :)
  I don't have any easy way to cite or reference them; but no doubt a god could if they so desired.
3. The fact that I felt the need to avoid posting -- and the need to resort to the totally unsatisfactory CB+SP process -- the Javascript question I mentioned in Re^4: [OT] How about an Off Topic Section? (CB+SP).
How will the existence of an OT section mitigate these problems?
1. It removes the doubt about what we can ask.
2. It removes the incentive for using the consideration process on the basis of "it's off-topic".
3. Those people for whom anything not directly Perl-related is an insult to their sensibilities; or a drain on their time to read; or whatever other reason why we have to: a) show perl-relatedness; b) label stuff [OT] would know not to look.
What are the potential negative consequences of having an OT section?
1. I'll steal salva's answer to that: I don't know if adding a new OT section to the repository is going to result in any overall improvement. What I know is that doing it is not going to harm it or anybody. What's the worst that could happen? an overwhelming number of off-topic questions?
2. None.
By what metrics do the gains (#2) outweigh the negatives (#3)?

Any gain - zero loss == gain!
Please take care adequately to address the distinction between experiences of the site from the poster's perspective and from the readers' perspective.

I think the distinction is mostly artificial, and implicitly biased.
Who is this place designed for? Is it the assistance of the posters? Or the entertainment of the readers?
The reality is that you cannot have one without the other.
But, you have to bias the balance in favour of the active versus the passive; the newbie versus the incumbent; the new-school versus the old-school; the "I've a problem I need help with" versus the "It's not a problem that I want to read about".
To do otherwise is to ensure the steady and inexorable decline of this place into a 1960s or even 1860s Gentleman's club of ol'foggies discussing their glorious pasts.
For every question one Monk considers [sic] off-topic; there are likely half a dozen other Monks for whom it is their daily bread & butter and would relish sharing their knowledge.

Are there limits to the subjects that should be discussed? Sure. But I think that the best solution to most of them is to simply let them go unanswered.

Or if they are so unrelated that we don't want there to be any answers, then simply freeze them in-place. That is, prevent any further interaction with them.

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I'm with torvalds on this

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Agile (and TDD) debunked

Comment on Re^5: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by Anonymous Monk on Jun 08, 2015 at 21:49 UTC
'Who is this place designed for? Is it the assistance of the posters? ' Perl posters.	[reply]
Re^7: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Jun 08, 2015 at 21:52 UTC
Say's the guy who can't even be bothered to sign in.... Yep! That's definitive! With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday' Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I'm with torvalds on this In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Agile (and TDD) debunked	[reply]
Re^8: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by Anonymous Monk on Jun 08, 2015 at 21:55 UTC
Registration is not necessary to dispel all those words you wrote with just a few more. How they say ... reeks of effort, yes.	[reply]
Re^6: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by jdporter (Paladin) on Jun 08, 2015 at 21:52 UTC
An example of this "languishing" is your consideration of the OP of this thread. There it sits; unable to be front-paged You're mistaken; the Approval Nodelet shows a "Front Page" checkbox. Update: I just front-paged that node. Please continue. ;-) I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.	[reply]
Re^6: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by jdporter (Paladin) on Jun 08, 2015 at 21:58 UTC
The fact that I felt the need to avoid posting A matter of perspective (and ego), clearly, but I'd call that an example of success of the current system.	[reply]
Re^7: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Jun 08, 2015 at 22:14 UTC
A matter of perspective (and ego), clearly, Feels like a dig; but I can't see what your getting at so I'll ignore it. I'd call that an example of success of the current system. I fail to see how limiting interactions between willing participants here can ever be considered a success; if we inhibited all interactions; that'd be an even bigger success right! Again, your judgement versus the expressed judgements of how many individuals? Vocal or silent, how many individuals have upvotes pro-posts; versus those that have down-voted anti-posts in this thread? And how many pro-OT section monk's have left this place taking their experience and knowledge with them because their jobs have evolved to mean they no longer work with Perl and thus find this place no longer of relevance? Maybe if this place was more tolerant of the reality that most of us daily deal with languages and subjects that whilst on the edges of Perl; are still relevant to what we do with Perl; more of those often highly knowledgeable people would still be around; and this place would be all the better for them. With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday' Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I'm with torvalds on this In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Agile (and TDD) debunked	[reply]
Re^8: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by jdporter (Paladin) on Jun 09, 2015 at 03:23 UTC
I fail to see how limiting interactions between willing participants here can ever be considered a success Nonetheless, I do think it is a success, because I am of the opinion that PerlMonks should remain focused on Perl. Sure, OT posts happen. But keeping that train from running away is a desirable end. I don't want to see the floodgates opened. if we inhibited all interactions; that'd be an even bigger success right! Surely you don't think I think that. But on the other hand, your position seems to be an extreme one: that there should be no constraints whatsoever. To me, the optimum would be: Everything Perl, and Very Little Else. your judgement versus the expressed judgements of how many individuals? My opinion. As a user of the site, I am entitled to one, yes? Hence my remark that it is a matter of perspective. how many individuals have upvotes pro-posts; versus those that have down-voted anti-posts in this thread? I don't know, but I don't believe those numbers would have much meaning, not least because people use their upvotes/downvotes to express quite a bit more than just agreement/disagreement with the (main?) position of the post. If the intent is to get a true democratic pulse, we'd probably want to run a poll. Even that would not be very meaningful, having as it would all the usual confounding factors. That's why I'm trying to take a different approach, one which I think would be effective under our circumstances. how many pro-OT section monk's have left this place.... I think you know as well as I do that (a) there is no way to know the answer to that question, and (b) your asking it is a straw man. Maybe if this place was more tolerant of the reality... If this place was the whole of the Internet -- as AOL tried to be, back in 1993 -- then there would be some merit to that argument. But if you want to talk about python, or cryptocurrencies, or The Chinese Threat, there are other, better places you can go. I've stressed that the "sections are not topical" -- but that's because PerlMonks is topical. And the topic is Perl! When you want to talk about Perl, or anything with even a tangential connection to Perl, this is the place to come. Just because you like the way PerlMonks works, and you feel at home here, that doesn't mean it has to be your sandbox for every purpose you can imagine. I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.	[reply]
Re^9: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Jun 09, 2015 at 04:25 UTC
Re^10: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by Anonymous Monk on Jun 09, 2015 at 04:34 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re^8: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by Anonymous Monk on Jun 08, 2015 at 22:19 UTC
'Maybe if this place was more tolerant of the reality that most of us daily deal with languages and subjects that whilst on the edges of Perl; are still relevant to what we do with Perl; more of those often highly knowledgeable people would still be around; and this place would be all the better for them.' And maybe they left because of intolerant people like you?	[reply]
Re^9: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Jun 08, 2015 at 22:24 UTC
Re^10: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by Anonymous Monk on Jun 08, 2015 at 22:27 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re^6: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by Anonymous Monk on Jun 08, 2015 at 21:51 UTC
Hello. This place is called PerlMonks. Not OffTopicMonks. See the difference?	[reply]
Re^7: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Jun 08, 2015 at 22:00 UTC
In that case; I guess you better ban me, cos I know a bit about lots of things that aren't Perl. I currently have 5 separate editor sessions running: 2 are mostly Perl files; with bits of C and C++ thrown in. 1 has mostly Javascript files; some html files; some css files. 1 is mostly C & C++ files with a smattering of makefiles and the like. 1 contains: 1 Dart file; 2 Go files; 2 Javascript files; and a Haskell file. Small minds rarely see beyond the obvious. With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday' Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I'm with torvalds on this In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Agile (and TDD) debunked	[reply]
Re^8: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by Anonymous Monk on Jun 08, 2015 at 22:05 UTC
This place is called PerlMonks. How is that for obvious?	[reply]
Re^9: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Jun 08, 2015 at 22:15 UTC
Re^10: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by Anonymous Monk on Jun 08, 2015 at 22:21 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re^8: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by Anonymous Monk on Jun 08, 2015 at 23:59 UTC
'I currently have 5 separate editor sessions running: 2 are mostly Perl files; with bits of C and C++ thrown in. 1 has mostly Javascript files; some html files; some css files. 1 is mostly C & C++ files with a smattering of makefiles and the like. 1 contains: 1 Dart file; 2 Go files; 2 Javascript files; and a Haskell file.' But you don't have a Github account?	[reply]
Re^9: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Jun 09, 2015 at 00:04 UTC
Re^10: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section? by Anonymous Monk on Jun 09, 2015 at 00:06 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here


Welcome to the Monastery
	PerlMonks