Re^5: Site facelift?

The point is deliberate refusal to adopt to a acknowledged trend thats going around currently. And Perl folks seem to do it because of the Not Invented here Syndrome.

What benefit is there in not recognizing the importance of a good looking site? If only content was important we would all be making phone calls and drawing money out of ATMs through command lines. But things don't work that way in the world, Unfortunately. Perception drives most of our choices.

Comment on Re^5: Site facelift?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Site facelift? by herveus (Prior) on Nov 18, 2010 at 13:29 UTC
Howdy! How is "refusal to adopt an acknowledged trend" a meaningful criticism? That's absurd. The site is not "ugly". It is highly functional and stable. You don't have to keep learning new quirks and unpleasant behavior on a weekly basis. This is not and should not be FaceBook. Change is incremental and deliberate. That is a Good Thing. yours, Michael	[reply]
Re^7: Site facelift? by Anonymous Monk on Jan 31, 2011 at 11:08 UTC
...It is highly functional and stable... Absolutely. Functionality and stability trumps fresh/cool/snazzy all day long. Making this website more responsive (ie faster) would be very welcome, but the benefit probably wouldn't be drastic -- programming is hard and requires careful and thoughtful responses, humans can only go so fast :)	[reply]
Re^6: Site facelift? by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Jan 28, 2011 at 16:35 UTC
There is so much wrong with that first paragraph. Deliberate, trend, acknowledged, NIHS... Hugely important swaths of modern Perl come from porting, often while improving, ideas from other languages Plack, KinoSearch, Catalyst, the ORMs, Moose. I like good looking sites. I don't agree that this one is bad looking. I'm quite neutral about it. I'm a designer. I agree with what herveus said. I come here to read and focus, not to be dazzled or distracted; this site's layout, as boring and old fashioned as it might be, affords exactly that. If you want a bridge to a more ideal/modern site, there's nothing stopping you from using and recommending StackOverflow's Perl tag. The discussions there seem to be less interesting, involved, and accurate though, and the best answers seem to mostly come from monks and major Perl figures, not average participants. Perception drives most of our choices Don't put me in your our and we. I'm too tired of this to mince words: perception only drives the choices of shallow, quick-fix jackasses. If the site design keeps that kind of person away, ++. You want Perl 6 now, write some. You want a pretty site, build it. Until you do one of those or at least start signing in with a username, you've seen the end of civility from me. COGTFO.	[reply]


The stupid question is the question not asked
	PerlMonks