Re: Re: RFC: Subscription to nodes

If we follow that direction why not just create comp.perl.perlmonks? Because, of course, it wouldn't have nearly the same community feel. No chatterbox, no user homenodes, no pretty html and css ;-), and so forth. It would become just another newsgroup rather than the current excellent resource it is.

It's also only one feature we're talking about here. Hardly worth a major change in my opinion :).

Comment on Re: Re: RFC: Subscription to nodes

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: RFC: Subscription to nodes by Abigail-II (Bishop) on Sep 22, 2003 at 20:57 UTC
I don't use the chatterbox; why should I? IRC has a much nicer interface. User homenodes isn't something I care about (after all, we do have the web already). As for HTML and such, I find it a blessing I can post plain text on Usenet; that on Usenet `$a [1]` only takes me 6 characters to type, and not the 19 of `<code>$a [1]</code>` I've to type here. This place doesn't even have the option of posting plain text, not even POD. (So much for a Perl site). It takes far less time to post on Usenet than to post here. Abigail	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re: Re: RFC: Subscription to nodes by BUU (Prior) on Sep 22, 2003 at 23:29 UTC
I don't use irc; why should I? The chatterbox is perfect for chatting with random monks who stop by. I love to see user home nodes, from the quick personal homenodes that let me know just a little bit more about the person behind the nickname to the gigantic repositories of information about this monastery. This place is better then usenet.	[reply]


good chemistry is complicated, and a little bit messy -LW
	PerlMonks