|
And the more you talk about it, the more you encourage him.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
True. This applies to normal work atmosphere also. Only when we bother about the people who keep envying at us, they would feel encouraged and show ridicule. The moment we start ignoring them, the Sun starts setting for them eternally. 
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Peter,
He is very opinionated. If I recall, he as an incredible amount of posts in 7 months... It makes me wonder who is running the company (if it is the fellow who I believe it is). It took me from 2003 until now to reach 500 posts.
He beleives he is correct in the flaming vote because others use terms such as TCP/IP and RSA which he does not understand. He desires a great amount of hand holding. If he does not get it, this is the outcome.
In another area, I told him I was not interested in his type of reader. It is a shame, since I'm all about transferring knowledge. But I'm not willing to put up with his demands and temper tantrums.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Ahhh - I think I know who you are on about. Not the gentleman with his own compiler offering by any chance?
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Pete,
Pete O`Hanlon wrote: Not the gentleman with his own compiler offering by any chance?
That's the one...
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
besides the fact that he's a pathetic mentally unstable looser with no life, do you have any grounds to suspect him as being the univoter?
--
You have to explain to them [VB coders] what you mean by "typed". their first response is likely to be something like, "Of course my code is typed. Do you think i magically project it onto the screen with the power of my mind?" --- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Dan,
dan neely wrote: do you have any grounds to suspect him as being the univoter?
do you have any grounds to suspect him as being the univoter?
Yes - I notice when I was engaging him on a different thread, each post was voted a '1'. Reference Articles on Applied Cryptography[^]. You'll notice most of my posts are rated three. I presume this was Dave Kreskowiak balancing out his univotes.
I understand this is a correlation; and correlation is not cause and effect. So, unless he admits to the actions, it is only a suspicion.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Dan,
It appears deleting the account took care of his previous capriciously cast votes. Since his account has disappeard (reference Dave's note below), my Average Article rating sky rocketed: 4.4 to 4.7. Reference Articles by Jeffrey Walton[^]. It appears each article lost one univote...
I know for a fact that An Analysis of the Windows PE Checksum Algorithm[^] went from 20 votes to 19, and the article rating improved from 4.49 to 4.71 recently. Personally, I thought it was pretty good article (though a bit advanced due to the assembly language interpretations). I don't beleive it deserved the '1' vote. Perhaps a 4 (or even a 3 if there is a blaring misinterpretation).
What frustrated me was the fact that I spend a lot of time on the articles - from developing graphics to writing and testing sample code on Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Server 2003, and Windows Vista. For an example, see Installation IDs Based on Truncated Hashing[^]. Each OS gave different results, which I did my best to document for others. Plus, this is my personal test lab (in my house) on my own time. I don't do anything like this on company time.
To add to it, I don't have a Compiler Company, which would infer a certain level software apptitude. I'm a Security Engineer and System Administrator. Software is for fun with me. I use it to supplement my other skills. I've never held a programming job in my life.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
His account is gone as far as I can tell. His entire profile is gone, ALL of his posts, everything. "The Grand Negus" doesn't exist anymore. I wonder if he created another account and is just keeping his mouth shut and voting one all over the place...? Hmmm...
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Dave,
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: His entire profile is gone, ALL of his posts, everything
No loss... I did see the post was gone which stated he did not know acronyms such as RSA and TCP. I thought he was regretting the post.
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: is just keeping his mouth shut and voting one all over the place...? Hmmm...
Perhaps. But I believe he cannot resist treating the world as his audience. He must really be in pain...
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Jeffrey Walton wrote: But I believe he cannot resist treating the world as his audience.
So true.
Jeffrey Walton wrote: He must really be in pain...
I do know what it's like to live with someone who pretty much thinks it's their way or no way. Thankfully, I didn't marry her...
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Dave,
See Univoter[^] (a bit further up the thread) for statistical improvements since his account has vanished... I'd have to say this is stronger than a correlation.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
No.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: No.
IS this a "No, and it won't be changed" or a "No, it's on the todo list but as a very low priority item. It may be fixed eventually"
--
You have to explain to them [VB coders] what you mean by "typed". their first response is likely to be something like, "Of course my code is typed. Do you think i magically project it onto the screen with the power of my mind?" --- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
|
|
|
|
|
The latter. 
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
There seems to be two issues here:
1) Email Addresses are not listed with the member's profile
2) Emails will not be sent if the Email Address is not verified
I'm trying to contact an author (from a message thread) who has not verified his email address, so I'm receiving The Member you are trying to contact has not confirmed their email address so no email can be sent.
Would it be possible to allow authors to choose the opt in so their email can be listed under their profile in some spam resistan way? To ensure privacy and circumvent mistakes, make 'Opt Out' default. The present use of 'All Opt Out' is frustrating.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Jeffrey Walton wrote: Email Addresses are not listed with the member's profile
It protects the email address of the member from spam.
Jeffrey Walton wrote: Emails will not be sent if the Email Address is not verified
It protects CodeProject email server.
|
|
|
|
|
Jeffrey Walton wrote: The present use of 'All Opt Out' is frustrating.
Since there is an email link on any post that the person has posted there is already an opt in. If the person has not confirmed their email address I think you can fairly well assume they've opted out.
Upcoming events:
* Glasgow: Mock Objects, SQL Server CLR Integration, Reporting Services, db4o, Dependency Injection with Spring ...
"I wouldn't say boo to a goose. I'm not a coward, I just realise that it would be largely pointless."
Ready to Give up - Your help will be much appreciated.
My website
|
|
|
|
|
There is a constant reminder to members with unconfirmed addresses that they should confirm their address. We can't send email without a confirmed address due to spam issues.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
I'm curious with respect to authors who no longer support their submissions. There is no stone tossing here - for whatever reason. Adding to the problem is the inability to contact authors by email address through their profiles.
Would it be possible to place articles into 'Conservatorship' until the author reappears? This way ports, updates, and other bug fixes can be incorporated for everyone to enjoy? I feel the current policy of 'Do Nothing' could be improved upon.
For example, 2D Graph ActiveX Control[^]. It appears Bruno Voisin is doing his best to field questions and update the article. Reference Re: .def file ordinals[^]. In my case, Jordan Walters took intiative on A UTF-16 Class for Reading and Writing Unicode Files[^] so I made him a coauthor.
Proposed Solution:
The proposed solutions has three parts.
1) Have the CP editiors post the port, bug fix, or modified code in the download area of the article with an appropriate note
2) Make a note in the Revision History that a 'Conservatorship Action' was taken, giving credit to the individual who performed the port, modification, or bug fix
3) Have comments directed to the individual in the Article's comment area (in addition to the original author).
Finally, reward the individual. Perhaps offering something to improve the the contributor's standing, similar to the way 500 post increases 1 level.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Jeffrey Walton wrote: MIA
|
|
|
|
|
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar wrote:
MIA = Missing in action.
Anything I will say you will bring it down to whatever you want.
- Le Centriste
|
|
|
|
|
This is an interesting idea. I can see two workarounds:- add a post to the article's forum - unless the changes are huge or very complex, I have seen this used very effectively (even by authors!) to communicate bug fixes and enhancements, in advance of the next update; and
- submit a new article, with a clear link back to the original article. And put a post on the original article's forum, linking to the new article.
Regarding your conservatorship idea, it would be a real mess if the original author suddenly popped up and said, "Whoa! What's all this crap? I want it deleted!" Then all your fixes would be wiped out.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Hans,
My humble opinion...
Hans Dietrich wrote: add a post to the article's forum
This can lead to omissions. For example, some of Michael Dunn's articles. There are literally pages of comments. I don't believe it is feasible to trace every thread of a comment.
Hans Dietrich wrote: Regarding your conservatorship idea, it would be a real mess if the original author suddenly popped up and said, "Whoa! What's all this crap? I want it deleted!" Then all your fixes would be wiped out.
This is a possibility. In the case of the Graph Chart, the author has not updated since 2003. Also, attempts to contact him have been in vain.
I believe adding the update (source files with bug fixes) and a Revision note is the least intrusive method (it is still intrusive). If the eauthor later shows and is hostile, delete the files and remove the note.
Also, when someone posts a fix ofsite, CodeProject traffic is lost. And this is how the CodeProject stays in business.
Again, I'm trying to reach a middle ground which benefits everyone. Obviously, it will probably be something which offends everyone involved.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Personally I would love to see the articles on CP become less proprietary and more like a wiki. (I think I hear Chris groaning.) The problem is one that you have experienced yourself - there are some immature people who visit the site, who would quickly make a mess of any kind of wiki.
Unless Chris has some solution, probably the best short-term answer is for you to just submit a new article - if you want ownership, then take it. I think I would first ask a CP editor to try to contact the author, but that's as much as you can reasonably do.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
