From PerlNet

Contents 1 Welcome to PerlNet 2 Orphaned pages 3 Tactfulness for Geeks 4 Perl Myths page 5 Perl 6 - Common Criticisms 6 Possessive apostrophes 7 Captcha whitelisting

Welcome to PerlNet

G'day Shlomi,

Just a quick note to say welcome to PerlNet, and to thank you for your hard work so far in moving and updating content. If you need a hand with anything, then please don't hesitate to get in touch.

All the very best,

--PJF ^(talk) 13:35, 14 July 2006 (EST)

Orphaned pages

G'day Shlomif,

I've noticed you've created a few pages which nothing links to. This means that noone will be able to find them. If you could find these pages appropriate parents that would be great!

• Resources for Presentors
• Legal Resources for Hackers
• Freenode Sharp Perl FAQ

I'm not 100% certain that this is the appropropriate place for the first two, but I'm willing to ignore that for now if you can make sure they're not orphans anymore.

Jarich ^(talk) 17:01, 26 April 2007 (EST)

Thanks for noting that - I'll take care of this now. --18:33, 26 April 2007 (EST)~

Tactfulness for Geeks

G'day Shlomif,

I appreciate your contributions to perlnet. With such a small community it's good to have someone who's willing to work on creating new and interesting content.

As I mentioned on the Tactfulness for Geeks talk page, I'm not sure that this article falls within the scope for perlnet. It's not even tangentially about Perl, and although there are Perl programmers who could certainly do with learning to be more tactful, they're unlikely to seek out that page to read it.

Additionally, I'm uncomfortable with you requesting readers not to revamp any article in the main section of this site. This is a wiki and like Wikipedia, all of it's articles should be available for editing and rewriting by everyone. Since you feel that this page is yours, and since it's very much written in the first person; I'd like to suggest that you move it to be under your own pages. You might use User:Shlomif/Tactfulness for Geeks for example. I would be very happy to facilitate this for you and will probably move the page over some time soon unless you can give me a good reason not to. Alternately if you have a site that you feel would be a better location for this content let me know and I'll be happy to help you relocate the content there.

Jarich ^(talk) 21:57, 26 April 2007 (EST)

Actually, it is related to Perl, as I noticed many tactlessness anti-patterns among the Perl community, where I'm heavily involved. But since there are many other wikis I can use, I'll probably move this resource there. Thanks!

Perl Myths page

G'day Shlomif,

Thankyou for your note this morning, I appreciate your response.

My focus for Perlnet is to have high quality pages about all sorts of Perl related topics. Thus, where I feel that I can improve an article to make it a higher quality, I will do so. I'm sorry that you don't like my changes to the Perl Myths page, but that's the great thing about wikis, you can take the current page and improve it further. I agree that there's certainly a lot more than can be done to improve it!

It took me quite a lot of effort to do the rewrite. I tried to keep most of your original ideas while removing the editorial voice ("It is in our opinion") and various likely-to-be contentious sections ("[workplaces] refuse to train good programmers with knowledge in other languages in Perl" -- particularly as my job disproves this). As the focus of this page appears to be advocacy for Perl I also removed anything which might be viewed as rubbishing the reader, their current tools and ideas.

The page revert was done by an anonymous user, with only that as an edit and no comment on the discussion page or on my user talk page about it. Upon consultation with Stennie and PJF on the IRC channel, I merged your later change (regarding David Wheeler's lines of code count) and performed the re-revert. Had I been certain the revert was from you I would have explained this earlier on your talk page.

Every time you edit an article, there is text under the Save and Preview buttons which includes: If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly [...] then don't submit it here. As such I feel justified in editing (for improvement -- as I see it) whichever articles take my fancy. I encourage you to do the same. I believe that we need many authors' contributions to articles in order to bring them to the best quality they can be.

Jarich ^(talk) 12:30, 29 April 2007 (EST)

Perl 6 - Common Criticisms

G'day Shlomif,

I'm sorry that my changes to this page altered the directions you were planning to take it. I certainly did not intend for the result to be seen as Perl-6-hype+Perl-5-FUD, as I think Perl 5 is a grand language, though I also think that Perl 6 is very exciting. Please feel encouraged to refute, alter or expand my content - or remove anything you feel is in error. I look forward to seeing the new version.

All the best,

Jarich ^(talk) 13:13, 13 May 2007 (EST)

Possessive apostrophes

G'day Shlomi,

To be honest, I don't really care if you want to appear ignorant of English grammatical rules, but I thought I'd point out that you are actually mistaken when you insist that the possessive of "Fish" is "Fish'". There is no special rule about apostrophe use for possessives when the last letter of the noun is a "h". The only special rule is when the last letter of the noun is an "s".

Thus we have for singular possessive:

• The cat's fur: The fur belonging to the cat.
• The dog's bowl: The bowl belonging to the dog.
• The fish's tail: The tail of the fish.
• The albatross's wing: The wing belonging to the albatross.
• The mouse's ears: The ears belonging to the mice.

We also have for plural possessive:

• The cats' enclosure: The enclosuer belonging to the multiple cats
• The dogs' ball: The ball belonging to the multiple dogs
• The clown fishes' anenome: the anenome belonging to (lived in by) the clown fishes.
• The albatrosses' nesting site: the nesting site belonging to the multiple albatrosses.
• The mice's hole: the hole belonging to the mice

We omit the "s" after the apostrophe when following an "s" only when it is not spoken (so this is dialect dependant). Thus both "James' hat" and "James's hat" are correct, depending on where you are. Perhaps you feel that the "s" is not required in "Fish's hat" because you pronounce it as "Fish hat", however this is not standard English.

These are all covered in the basic exercises in the Student Development Services' "The Possessive Apostrophe" handout from the University of Western Ontario if you'd like another reference.

If you feel I'm wrong, I'd be very happy for you to show me a reference which says that words ending with "h" are treated specially.

All the best,

jarich

Thanks for noting that. I stand corrected also see the Saxon genitive. I'll correct it in the place where it was corrected and then reverted by me. I believed that an "sh" ending also generates a "'" possessive rather than an "'s" one, but I guess I was mistaken. I guess you learn a new thing every day. Shlomif 21:33, 17 June 2007 (EST)

Captcha whitelisting

G'day Shlomi,

Just a quick note to say that your account (and all other known-good contributors) should now be whitelisted from the captcha. If you continue to receive it, do let me know.

Cheerio,

--PJF 22:38, 24 October 2007 (EST)