more useful options | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
and subsequently full of reasons why we don't need it. Full of one reason: the gods -- which currently translates to 'two monks with an exclusive veto' -- don't want to be bothered with it. But if you want it then go write and implement it yourself instead of asking others to do your work for you. What a crock. Tell a guy that has no access to the code; to "implement it yourself". (That argument sounds familiar: Hi Mono!) Is it really so hard? Could not one of the relatively recently removed sections -- Code Catacombs; Craft; Snippet etc. -- simply be re-purposed? Inner Scriptorium managed to materialise from nowhere back in September 2004; so it is possible. It didn't seem to require a huge effort; and there were no major disruptions at the time. So this isn't about implementation effort or willing volunteers; or valuable time of those empowered to do it: Its simply about the willingness (or lack thereof) to recognise what the users want. Users, who are the life blood, and only meaningful reason for this place' continued existence. 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
In reply to Re^3: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section?
by BrowserUk
|
|