However, your reply seems to indicate that you feel information, regardless of presentation and/or content, is worthwhile. My feeling is this: if you're going to present information to me, please have the decency to actually give me usable information in a format that I can understand it in.

We have all taken classes where the textbook(s) were completely unreadable. Math and science classes are notorious for this, though certainly not the sole offenders. No-one would ever say that there was no information in those textbooks, but did you learn more from that or from a textbook that presented its information clearly, succinctly, and excited you to go learn more?

This is one reason why the O'Reilly books are so popular - their presentation gives information out in easy doses that are fun to read. Had I learned Perl from a book similar to the one I learned Pascal from, I wouldn't be nearly as excited to use the language as I am today.

Reviews should be the same. I would encourage kommesel to rewrite his review. If written well, I will gladly ++ it. In fact, I'll ++ any well-written, thought-out review, even if I disagree with the reviewer's conclusions. A node that's just slapped together and makes me work unnecessarily for the information it contains is not adding anything to the monastery. In fact, it's detracting from the overall quality of the monastery. A well-written review of Curious George or The Cat in the Hat does contribute. It gives a good example of a review, even if the node's information doesn't contribute to the collective knowledge of Perl.

------
We are the carpenters and bricklayers of the Information Age.

Vote paco for President!