educated_foo

+1

I assume you are ranting about Jeffrey Kegler. Where is the problem? I enjoy his posts and have no idea why you consider them spam.

Whether someone automates the posting-process or not is completely irrelevant for judging the contents of the posts.

I see no indication of him ignoring comments and even if he would ignore them, I couldn't see any reason to call this "abuse".

Finally, unfortunately the majority of authors here ignores the "policy" on front-page posts.

@confuseAcat: At least I am massively disturbed by his super long posts. Full ack from me to educated_foo.

(Besides I am missing a "like" button ever since here. I think chimerix does too)

I would vote for a default way of shortening front-page posts and even for an enforced maximum. (But I will not implement it though...)

I'm disturbed by people disturbed by long posts they can just skip with a single button.

How can I flag this post as "abuse [of my time]"?

We are aware that some posts on blogs.perl.org are a little long for convenient skimming from the front page. We're contacting some of the people concerned with a friendly reminder that splitting posts up is helpful for readers, and we're also investigating technical approaches to dealing with long posts.

I don't think that Jeff Kegler is the worst offender by far. And I really don't think it is helpful to describe his posts as spam.

If you want to alert us to any kind of problem with the site then the feedback link is the best way to do it.

Personally, I find his posts fascinating and are glad they are here. It is refreshing to see original research implemented for and usable by Perl.

Now if only we could use his parser instead of perl's toke.c and yacc...

This ignorant topic is more the spam.

I enjoy reading Jeffrey's posts and am grateful that he re-posts here else I might miss some of his articles.

Technically his posts aren't spam.

From what I can tell of the complaints in the above comments and the OP: the issue is a subjective view of how long posts should be not of the actual content of the posts.

Personally I don't care if the post is 5 characters long or 2,000 lines long. I have a news aggregators that allow me to choose which articles to read regardless of length. YMMV

Kegler's posts are most definitely *NOT* spam. They are well-thought-out, well-reasoned, and well-written articles on a very difficult area of computation. That he's taking the time to bring the bleeding-edge of parsers to Perl say a lot about the Perl community.

Unlike this post.

I enjoy seeing Jeffrey's posts. I don't always read them but I'm very happy he's doing his research using perl. I don't consider them spam. I don't consider this post to be spam either, but it could have been more nicely worded by the OP. I don't mind scrolling past Jeffrey's long posts, but seeing as how there's a front page policy, I think Dave Cross's comment to the effect that Jeffrey's being contacted about it is appropriate.