Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Perl Monk, Perl Meditation
 
PerlMonks  

Re^3: Perl at play?

by pKai (Priest)
on Mar 12, 2007 at 08:56 UTC ( #604301=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^2: Perl at play?
in thread Perl at play?

I was under the impression that moving an unapproved node is easy, and does not require a janitor?!

At least this would be a viable alternative compared to letting such posts rot in the limbo of withhold approval, as happened recently with this "gem".

Also, going with the monastry theme, I would call such a section "sanctuary" ;-)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Perl at play?
by blazar (Canon) on Mar 12, 2007 at 11:35 UTC
    I was under the impression that moving an unapproved node is easy, and does not require a janitor?!

    But who decides what is trollish? I think that such a thing would still need to go through a mechanism like the consideration one.

    At least this would be a viable alternative compared to letting such posts rot in the limbo of withhold approval, as happened recently with this "gem".

    But in fact, however annoying that poster can be, I'm still half-hearted thinking of whether he's an actual troll or not, although the two halves are not equal any more!

    Anyway, thinking of this issue better, I see how it may actually get to work: reasoning for simplicity on the previously mentioned poster, if he's not really a troll then moving his trollish posts to the trollish section would decrease the possibility of him to get an answer. Then he would ask why his posts get moved there. Hopefully, first or later, moved by the necessity of getting actual answers he may learn to decrese the trollish elements from his posts. Well, it may work, after all...

    Also, going with the monastry theme, I would call such a section "sanctuary" ;-)

    I'm not really sure, a sanctuary is a sacred place. It is true that "in medieval law, a sanctuary was a place of religious right of asylum for felons on the run from the law", but I don't like the idea of a sacred place filled up with trollish content. Also, in modern parlance, a "sanctuary" is often associated with the idea of a very pleasant environment, like in "animal sanctuary". But it wouldn't be very pleasant if filled up with trollish content either. I get the religious metaphor of the Monastery, but I wouldn't like the religion implicitly involved to be too forgiving! :-) OTOH the trollish section could certainly not be "troll" or anything similar, and if so, it should be "hidden", for otherwise it could convey a very bad image about the Monastery, as a place where trolling is allowed or even encouraged. Actually if it were "hidden", it would be a good means for trollish content not to get answers and thus it could enforce its educational purpose. Well, just a few bits of brainstorming...

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://604301]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others scrutinizing the Monastery: (6)
As of 2021-04-14 07:20 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found

    Notices?