|
For people with a certain threshold of 1 votes in the lounge by a certain threshold of voters. Ban their IP for 30 days, delete all their messages, 1 voted or not.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
I like that idea. It should certainly help to stem the tide.
|
|
|
|
|
Until they get wind of it and start 1-voting normal members as an act of revenge. Sorry guys - this is a bad idea simply because of the very childish bullshit we are trying to stop.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
I agree. I can see it now - the "Banishment Wars" begin...
It would be so much more effective to just ignore them.
|
|
|
|
|
Here's a better idea: ignore them, and stop responding to them. As long as you (and I mean we as a community) continue to give these people validation by responding to their inanity they will continue to post.
Ignore them and report the messages so they get deleted and they'll soon disappear.
|
|
|
|
|
martin_hughes wrote: Ignore them and report the messages so they get deleted and they'll soon disappear.
I disagree with your conclusion. 
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
I give you a 100% money back guarantee! I feel completely safe doing so as 1) You've given me no money, and 2) Chumps feed on attention. Take away the chump-feed and they wither into nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: I disagree with your conclusion.
Why? When you only act or respond to evil sinister acts, we are fuelling the burning fire. Just discard them to trash and after some time, the evil prankster would get bored of his life and run away.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson
|
|
|
|
|
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar wrote: the evil prankster would get bored of his life and run away.
In my experience, no they don't.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
I agree,
What's banning them going to achieve anyway? They can just make a new account and continue the abuse.
|
|
|
|
|
What is going to prevent that the trolls make the same with correct users? This automatic ban is a 2 sides axe and can be potentially dangerous for other users. A/Some f*cker/s can just create many accounts as he/she/they want and vote you 1 with all, so you may would get banned automatically and your interesting posts deleted as well.
I agree the opinion of martin. The best weapon against an idiot is just to ignore them. A quote:
Don't argue with an idiot, he will decrease your level to his and will beat you because of his experience.
(actually it comes from the spanish: "No discutas con un idiota, te rebajará a su nivel y te ganará por experiencia". So if someone can kindly translate it correctly, please... )
Edit: Some typos and one sentence added.
Greetings.
--------
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
“The First Rule of Program Optimization: Don't do it. The Second Rule of Program Optimization (for experts only!): Don't do it yet.” - Michael A. Jackson
modified on Sunday, May 18, 2008 7:48 AM
|
|
|
|
|
How many people have a fixed IP address?
Mine changes a few times a day, even if I don't want it to change.
And I can make it change any time I want.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: How many people have a fixed IP address?
I do.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
Sure you do, provided you need it.
Over here, you need a fixed IP to offer a service, and then your Internet Provider
charges you extra for it. The regular provider subscription kicks you out every so many
hours, so you end up reconnecting, with different IP addresses each time.
|
|
|
|
|
I know all about how dynamic IPs work. I'm paying extra for static IPs (five of them).
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
It's too open to abuse and IP addresses are not a foolproof way of identifying someone. What if someone behind (one of) [Insert Large Company]'s firewalls misbehaves? Do I block all of their employees?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Do I block all of their employees?
Absolutely. That's the repurcusion.
<blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">Chris Maunder wrote:</div>It's too open to abuse </blockquote>
I'm sort of considering an article that models lounge behavior and explores this, coming up with algorithms that detect perversion but succeed at proper detection. 
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: perversion
Ooohhh... "perversion". Count me in.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: Ban their IP for 30 days
This is bad because many ISPs dynamically assign IP addresses.
modified 29-Aug-18 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I would like to nominate Sasha Barber.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
Tricky - yup Sacha would be up there, but I'd also have to nominate Karl Shiflett (even though he does love his VB.NET). The Rockstar is also a great choice - but let's not forget Bill Sergio; the man's a legend in his own mind. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now both the URLs are responded with a 404 and I am provided with
/kb/com/javanet.aspx
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson
|
|
|
|
|
Where is that link?
On your article page[^] it points to the correct article
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
With CP 2.0, we got the ability to change our votes. That's great. Really great. My sloppy mousing need no longer be a source of pain and frustration, at least not here.
But, there seem to be a fair number of people who do not yet realize that this is possible. I have a theory: since the voting form goes away when you submit your vote, it feels like a not-so-subtle hint that the action is irreversible. Granted, if you re-load the page then the form is back... but that requires to you reload and look for it.
Perhaps it would help if the form just didn't go away? Surely there's no technical reason why submitting votes needs to overwrite the form itself with the status...
Citizen 20.1.01 'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
