[QUIZ] Proposed new rule

[Martin DeMello]

Christian Neukirchen wrote:
While we are at it, let me propose:
[ALIOTH-SHOOTOUT], [I-REALLY-WANT-TO-THE-RAILS-LIST], [SOAP],
[SYMBOL], [SYNTAX-TWEAKS], [TROLL], [WEB].

Thank you.


How about [META] for discussions about the list itself?

Would discussions about the [META] tag itself qualify as
[META][META] ?

Uh-oh. What do we do if we're talking about metaprogramming?

Use an eigentag, of course.

martin

 

[James Britt]

We already have a few established tags which people DO use and nobody
seems to be averse towards. [ANN], [RAILS], and [QUIZ]. so it seems
like the only argument is over exactly how many there should be...not
whether we should have them at all. so i don't see why a suggestion to
add _2_ more should be mocked as the equivalent of saying we make a
specific tag for everything under the sun....we have 3 already. i
suggested we have a whopping 5! watch out--i'm crrrrrrazy!

i respect the logical arguments to stick with just the 3 and that's
fine but that's no reason to act like one or two more is completely
outlandish.

I expect that a general community consensus will determine what get
used. People make up subject tags as they see fit, and if they strike a
chord with others, they get picked up. Useless or confusing tags simply
go away.

I've seen [SOLUTION] used when people have been pursuing some general
problem (e.g., getting Ruby MySQL binary bindings working on Win32) and
finally reach a solution. So it has a history already.



--

http://www.ruby-doc.org - Ruby Help & Documentation
http://www.artima.com/rubycs/ - Ruby Code & Style: Writers wanted
http://www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
http://www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys
http://www.30secondrule.com - Building Better Tools

 

[James Britt]

While we are at it, let me propose:
[ALIOTH-SHOOTOUT], [I-REALLY-WANT-TO-THE-RAILS-LIST], [SOAP],
[SYMBOL], [SYNTAX-TWEAKS], [TROLL], [WEB].

Thank you.

How about [META] for discussions about the list itself?

Would discussions about the [META] tag itself qualify as
[META][META] ?

I'm looking for the list that that discusses lists that don't discuss
themselves.


James

--

http://www.ruby-doc.org - Ruby Help & Documentation
http://www.artima.com/rubycs/ - Ruby Code & Style: Writers wanted
http://www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
http://www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys
http://www.30secondrule.com - Building Better Tools

 

[Chad Perrin]

I agree. using [SOLUTION] by itself makes sense.

I like the idea of extending this concept further. Is it already a
"recommendation" that new software announcements (or updates) have
[ANN] in their subject line?

How about [QUESTION] for people looking for programming help, as well? ;o)

... and then we can have [ANSWER] for the responses, not to mention
other things like [SUGGESTION], [RANT], [LANGUAGE-WAR], etc. And since
[OT] is already in use, for the sake of parity, we should also have
[ON-TOPIC].

. . or we could use [OT] for that, too, but it's a *different* [OT]
than the [OT] used for off-topic stuff. Really it is.

 

[Chad Perrin]

I expect that a general community consensus will determine what get
used. People make up subject tags as they see fit, and if they strike a
chord with others, they get picked up. Useless or confusing tags simply
go away.

I've seen [SOLUTION] used when people have been pursuing some general
problem (e.g., getting Ruby MySQL binary bindings working on Win32) and
finally reach a solution. So it has a history already.

True, that . . . it's sort of a "critical mass consensus" thing that
tends to lead to stuff like public wiki policy and Usenet traditions
like the one regarding Godwin's Law and the end of a discussion.

 

[Chad Perrin]

Use an eigentag, of course.

Of course. Silly me.

 

[Hal Fulton]

I'm looking for the list that that discusses lists that don't discuss
themselves.

alt.spanish.barber


Hal

 

[James Britt]

alt.spanish.barber

But of course!


James
--

http://www.ruby-doc.org - Ruby Help & Documentation
http://www.artima.com/rubycs/ - Ruby Code & Style: Writers wanted
http://www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
http://www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys
http://www.30secondrule.com - Building Better Tools

 

[Ross Bamford]

I agree. using [SOLUTION] by itself makes sense.

I like the idea of extending this concept further. Is it already a
"recommendation" that new software announcements (or updates) have
[ANN] in their subject line?

How about [QUESTION] for people looking for programming help, as

well? ;o)

... and then we can have [ANSWER] for the responses, not to mention
other things like [SUGGESTION], [RANT], [LANGUAGE-WAR], etc. And since
[OT] is already in use, for the sake of parity, we should also have
[ON-TOPIC].

. . or we could use [OT] for that, too, but it's a *different* [OT]
than the [OT] used for off-topic stuff. Really it is.

[^OT] ?

Kinda works I guess. Maybe they should be switched though, since on-topic
is hopefully the common case and so should be quicker to type...

 

[Chad Perrin]

I agree. using [SOLUTION] by itself makes sense.

I like the idea of extending this concept further. Is it already a
"recommendation" that new software announcements (or updates) have
[ANN] in their subject line?

How about [QUESTION] for people looking for programming help, as
well? ;o)

... and then we can have [ANSWER] for the responses, not to mention
other things like [SUGGESTION], [RANT], [LANGUAGE-WAR], etc. And since
[OT] is already in use, for the sake of parity, we should also have
[ON-TOPIC].

. . or we could use [OT] for that, too, but it's a *different* [OT]
than the [OT] used for off-topic stuff. Really it is.

[^OT] ?

Kinda works I guess. Maybe they should be switched though, since on-topic
is hopefully the common case and so should be quicker to type...

. . or [!OT].

 

[Bill Kelly]

I agree. using [SOLUTION] by itself makes sense.

I like the idea of extending this concept further. Is it already a
"recommendation" that new software announcements (or updates) have
[ANN] in their subject line?

How about [QUESTION] for people looking for programming help, as
well? ;o)

... and then we can have [ANSWER] for the responses, not to mention
other things like [SUGGESTION], [RANT], [LANGUAGE-WAR], etc. And since
[OT] is already in use, for the sake of parity, we should also have
[ON-TOPIC].

. . or we could use [OT] for that, too, but it's a *different* [OT]
than the [OT] used for off-topic stuff. Really it is.

[^OT] ?

Kinda works I guess. Maybe they should be switched though, since on-topic
is hopefully the common case and so should be quicker to type...

Excellent! What a savings! =D


Love it,

Bill

 

[James Britt]

If we want to get really bold, the rule could also ask people
submitting solutions to start the subject with "[QUIZ][SOLUTION]" )

Yuck.

[SOLUTION] implies [QUIZ], I think, so we can drop the repatition.

Well, no.

People have used SOLUTION for, well, solutions, for all sorts of
problems that they have asked of the list.

I've begun sorting certain topics into separate directories to reduce
the traffic in my main ruby-talk folder. Having all QUIZ related items
contain QUIZ in the subject makes it pretty clear, as opposed to
assuming that people will only post solutions to quizzes.


Thanks,

James
--

http://www.ruby-doc.org - Ruby Help & Documentation
http://www.artima.com/rubycs/ - Ruby Code & Style: Writers wanted
http://www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
http://www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys
http://www.30secondrule.com - Building Better Tools

 

[James Edward Gray II]

If we want to get really bold, the rule could also ask people
submitting solutions to start the subject with "[QUIZ]
[SOLUTION]" )

Yuck.
[SOLUTION] implies [QUIZ], I think, so we can drop the repatition.

Well, no.

People have used SOLUTION for, well, solutions, for all sorts of
problems that they have asked of the list.

I've begun sorting certain topics into separate directories to
reduce the traffic in my main ruby-talk folder. Having all QUIZ
related items contain QUIZ in the subject makes it pretty clear, as
opposed to assuming that people will only post solutions to quizzes.

I'm not clear on what you are asking me for here. You want the
[QUIZ] rule and no [SOLUTION] rule? Do I have that right?

James Edward Gray II

 

[James Britt]

I'm not clear on what you are asking me for here. You want the [QUIZ]
rule and no [SOLUTION] rule? Do I have that right?

I'm saying that [SOLUTION] by itself does not imply [QUIZ]; all
quiz-related posts (initial quiz details, questions about the quiz in
particular or quizzes in general, solutions t quizzes, etc.) should have
QUIZ in the subject.

Adding SOLUTION to that subject line (i.e. [QUIZ SOLUTION]) would then
make it clearer for folks who do not want to inadvertently read a
proposed quiz solution, while not assuming that all solutions posted to
the list revolve around quizzes.

(In general, though, I'm not enamored of "rules"; it's more a matter of
a general etiquette suggestion. [SOLUTION] is pretty general, has been
used in the past for various posts, and should not be conflated with any
particular sub-topic. )

Thanks,


James Britt



--

http://www.ruby-doc.org - Ruby Help & Documentation
http://www.artima.com/rubycs/ - Ruby Code & Style: Writers wanted
http://www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
http://www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys
http://www.30secondrule.com - Building Better Tools

 

[James Edward Gray II]

I'm not clear on what you are asking me for here. You want the
[QUIZ] rule and no [SOLUTION] rule? Do I have that right?

I'm saying that [SOLUTION] by itself does not imply [QUIZ]; all
quiz-related posts (initial quiz details, questions about the quiz
in particular or quizzes in general, solutions t quizzes, etc.)
should have QUIZ in the subject.

That's a good point. You're right.

Adding SOLUTION to that subject line (i.e. [QUIZ SOLUTION]) would
then make it clearer for folks who do not want to inadvertently
read a proposed quiz solution, while not assuming that all
solutions posted to the list revolve around quizzes.

If I do this though we now have two new rules: [QUIZ] and [QUIZ
SOLUTION]. I don't want to get too draconian with Ruby Quiz procedure.

I'm not too worried about people bumping into solutions accidentally
either, since the "no spoiler period" handles this quite well, in my
opinion.

I'll add a suggestion to the quizzes for a [QUIZ] in the subject and
we can see if that changes anything...

Thanks to all for bringing this to my attention.

James Edward Gray II

 

[Chad Perrin]

I'm not clear on what you are asking me for here. You want the [QUIZ]
rule and no [SOLUTION] rule? Do I have that right?

I'm saying that [SOLUTION] by itself does not imply [QUIZ]; all
quiz-related posts (initial quiz details, questions about the quiz in
particular or quizzes in general, solutions t quizzes, etc.) should have
QUIZ in the subject.

Adding SOLUTION to that subject line (i.e. [QUIZ SOLUTION]) would then
make it clearer for folks who do not want to inadvertently read a
proposed quiz solution, while not assuming that all solutions posted to
the list revolve around quizzes.

Holy cow, we're talking about namespaces.

 

[James Britt]

...

Holy cow, we're talking about namespaces.

Yeah, well, I didn't want to bring that up, but that's in a nutshell.

(So I guess we can refer people to past threads on picking names for
third-party Ruby libraries, and why people should pause before claiming
a fairly generic or common name for things. Or something.)

James


--

http://www.ruby-doc.org - Ruby Help & Documentation
http://www.artima.com/rubycs/ - Ruby Code & Style: Writers wanted
http://www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
http://www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys
http://www.30secondrule.com - Building Better Tools