|
Paul Conrad wrote: Yes, I did, and this topic has been beaten to death for a long time on this site
No, it hasn't. As a typical bunch of software developers all manner of time has been spent kicking around every conceivable technical solution to univoters and other abuse but as is typical no one has bothered to state the obvious: just get rid of it, it serves *no* useful purpose. It's called thinking outside the box. 
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it."
-Sam Levenson
|
|
|
|
|
John C wrote: It's called thinking outside the box
Not Luddism?
Jon
Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
|
|
|
|
|
That's funny, I've accused others of being luddites here myself but I never expected anyone to attribute it to me.
Seriously though, no it isn't. Sometimes the best feature you can add to a program is to take an annoyance that serves no useful purpose away from it.
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it."
-Sam Levenson
|
|
|
|
|
John C wrote: No, it hasn't
Yes, it has, and seems to come up about once every six months or so. This topic has come up before and is pretty much dead.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
I've brought up getting rid of the voting system a few times since it's inception, I don't recall anyone else suggesting it.
I do recall endless and regular threads about all manner of ways of fine tuning it, as far as I can see there is no way of fine tuning it but getting rid of it fixes the problem in one go.
So far not one person has ever posted a reason why they like it that I can see, only fatalistic posts about how were stuck with it as if the users of this site are powerless or something.
I don't recall anyone bothering to take any time to defend it either, possibly because it's easier to just 1 vote me than to have a meaningful conversation about it which illustrates my argument beautifully.
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it."
-Sam Levenson
|
|
|
|
|
I like the system on MSDN forums where you can mark a reply as a "good answer". Its CP equivalent would be that you can vote a post a 5 or not vote at all. Voting a post a 1 kinda brings bad feeling all around.
Of course, "Mark as abuse" should still be there. But it shouldn't gray out a post. If enough people mark a post as abuse it should be auto-deleted but without ever showing gray. That way people won't be able to use mob-voting to remove any particular member's posts.
|
|
|
|
|
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: If enough people mark a post as abuse it should be auto-deleted but without ever showing gray.
I've often thought that clicking the abuse button should reduce the post's opacity by 10%. If enough people click abuse, the post would completely disappear.
|
|
|
|
|
Hans Dietrich wrote: If enough people click abuse, the post would completely disappear.
I agree. I've found voting abuse for the posts that should be in the SB that spill over into the Lounge, sort of keeps the SB stuff in place.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Conrad wrote: sort of keeps the SB stuff in place.
But we need a "belongs in the lounge" button, in SB. 
Jon
Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, and vise versa, a "belongs in the Soapbox" button, in the Lounge 
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Conrad wrote: Yes, and vise versa, a "belongs in the Soapbox" button, in the Lounge
If it got used frequently, everyone would fall asleep reading the Lounge.
Jon
Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe we could have a "Send to Soapbox" button, and it could slowly appear on the soapbox whilst it was disappearing from the lounge!
Peter
"Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
|
|
|
|
|
It's such a tiny issue to get worked up about.
Jon
Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
|
|
|
|
|
No it's not because you probably weren't here before the voting started. Ever since the tone of the message boards has taken a steep dive for the worse. It's a tiny issue I guess if you don't give a crap about this site, but if you had been here from the beginning and cared at all you might see it differently.
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it."
-Sam Levenson
|
|
|
|
|
John C wrote: because you probably weren't here before the voting started
I'm always impressed by folks who do their homework. I just passed the 5 year mark.
John C wrote: Ever since the tone of the message boards has taken a steep dive for the worse.
The site is getting larger and attracting more grumps and more people to be grumpy about. That won't change if you get rid .of the voting, methinks.
John C wrote: It's a tiny issue I guess if you don't give a crap about this site, but if you had been here from the beginning and cared at all you might see it differently
Okay, you are so much more noble than I am, I am blinded by your light. (But I won't 1-vote you )
Jon
Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
|
|
|
|
|
Oakman wrote: I'm always impressed by folks who do their homework. I just passed the 5 year mark.
Hmmm...I seem to remember the voting being older than that but whatever, if you were here before the voting then you know the difference in that time.
Oakman wrote: The site is getting larger and attracting more grumps and more people to be grumpy about. That won't change if you get rid .of the voting, methinks.
Voting discourages having a conversation about anything, perhaps you're right, less conversation might result in less nuisance posting, I'm not convinced though.
Oakman wrote: Okay, you are so much more noble than I am, I am blinded by your light. (But I won't 1-vote you )
Vote away, I ignore the votes anyway.
See how we're having a conversation here instead of just 1 or 5 voting each other? That's what I'm talking about.
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it."
-Sam Levenson
|
|
|
|
|
John C wrote: Vote away, I ignore the votes anyway.
Exactly. That's my m.o. until Chris does away with the voting, or improves it to the point that people could be more mature about it. Maybe only give voting privileges to members who have been around for say, more than 3 years and they post on a regular basis.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
Oakman wrote: It's such a tiny issue to get worked up about.
I agree and I could really care less about it.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously that's not true or you wouldn't be posting in this thread at all.
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it."
-Sam Levenson
|
|
|
|
|
It's not that I care about the voting system, it's the on going rant about doing away with it that is more a debate to me. Bottom line, fix it to make it somehow idiot proof.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
I agree - the whole 'bad reply/good reply' thing means that people who are obviously not capable of detecting that they have been given the only possible answer, mark it as bad, on the basis that it requires thought on their part. However, it's also true anyone can mark replies, at a minimum, I suggest only allowing platinum members and the person who asked the question to mark the answers. Then at least those answering know for sure that the user is the one who down marked their ( perfectly correct ) reply.
Christian Graus
Please read this if you don't understand the answer I've given you. If you're still stuck, ask me for more information.
|
|
|
|
|
i using codeproject past one year it is working good, realy good. Some time i fill very happy with this unit.
Ok small suggesstion, In article search i thing no need for AND, OR, NOT, etc,. Why cont you use general search. most of the time if i search means it wont reply for my search query.
And one more thing, for feed back responses are very slow. Please make it fast.
And other then my knowledge it working great. Keep it up..... 
Senthil.S
Software Engineer
|
|
|
|
|
Senthil S wrote: And one more thing, for feed back responses are very slow. Please make it fast.
What is "feedback responses"?
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Colin,
I mentioned the feedbacks given to webmaster@codeproject.com.
Thanks for the response.
Senthil S
Senthil.S
Software Engineer
|
|
|
|
|
Senthil S wrote: In article search i thing no need for AND, OR, NOT, etc
You don't need to use AND, OR etc but, when you put in search terms, there is an implicit assumption that you are using AND between your terms so we put these in to make it clear. Showing exactly what your query is actually doing also means that if you use our more advanced features such as parentheses and multiple AND/ORs then it's clear as to what our system is interpreting your query as.
Senthil S wrote: for feed back responses are very slow
Not sure what you mean.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
