|
BillWoodruff wrote: Further, the person, implies I am not using CP's standard quote mechanism, when, in fact I am; the only variation is that I am inserting a carriage return, and putting the quote in italics which, in my opinion, makes it more apparent that the quote is a quote (coming from a long background of technical editing, having any quote without quotation marks doesn't quite seem enough to me).
CP's standard quote mechanism is <blockquote>, your messages[^] are appearing with the quote only in italics and not block quoted. Is this by design on your part because the result is that what you're quoting isn't marked off in the standard fashion and does, without more detailed inspection, appear to be material that you wrote.
3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|
|
Bill,
It's in part your own doing. When you remove the block-quote, you lose the style CP has for quotes, and to someone replying to your post it's not immediately obvious that some of the text in your message is a quote. I had to read your post twice to realize that the text you had was a quote from Quartz' original post. I don't blame the guy for thinking those words were from you.
|
|
|
|
|
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: It's in part your own doing.
Hi Nish,
I agree with you; clearly my having the "Do not interpret HTML tags" checkbox checked resulted in a non-standard appearance to my quoting. That was an accident; it's funny I don't have any memory of checking that checkbox.
However, in my opinion, someone who took offense to my doing this should have reported me to the site here in this forum, or voted to remove my messages by reporting them as "abuse."
A CP member who uses a mistake on another's part as an excuse to take "vigilante" action by deliberately mis-quoting not only the original poster, but the commenter, is, in my humble opinion, someone with a real problem, and someone who does not respect CP.
I feel the same way about certain CP members (among the most "prolific" on the Lounge) who continually post their own technical questions in the Lounge which clearly belong in specific forums here that are "sitting there waiting," and who, for some reasons, are not flamed for doing so. While others are grilled down to "char."
I respect CP. And I apolgize for any confusion my simple mistake caused.
thanks, Bill
"Many : not conversant with mathematical studies, imagine that because it [the Analytical Engine] is to give results in numerical notation, its processes must consequently be arithmetical, numerical, rather than algebraical and analytical. This is an error. The engine can arrange and combine numerical quantities as if they were letters or any other general symbols; and it fact it might bring out its results in algebraical notation, were provisions made accordingly." Ada, Countess Lovelace, 1844
|
|
|
|
|
The reputation graph size is not the same for all users, atleast not on my system. A majority of the graphs are scaling to the graph window, but a few (like mine) do not scale up.
| There are only 10 types of people in this world — those who understand binary, and those who don't. |
|
|
|
|
|
Try hitting Ctrl+F5.
You are probably seeing caching issues.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: caching issues
I cleaned up the IE cache and tried again, no luck. This problem seems to be occuring on IE 8.
The graph works fine on other browsers.
Are any other users experiencing this?
| There are only 10 types of people in this world — those who understand binary, and those who don't. |
modified on Thursday, January 7, 2010 12:05 AM
|
|
|
|
|
Abhinav S wrote: Are any other users experiencing this?
Yes. Same happens for me, also using IE8.
|
|
|
|
|
_Damian S_ wrote: Yes. Same happens for me, also using IE8.
Strange - when I view your graph in IE8 I can view it perfectly.
Is there a bug in the graph wrt to IE8? I am very certain I've cleared my cache.
I went to tools > preferences > delete - unchecked the first box (preserve favourite website data), checked all the others and ran delete (and I did Ctrl + F5 separately).
| There are only 10 types of people in this world — those who understand binary, and those who don't. |
modified on Thursday, January 7, 2010 2:27 AM
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I do (IExplorer 7 here)
BTW... Ctrl + F5 didn't work for me.
EDIT: It is now working good for me.
Regards.
--------
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
Rating helpfull answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Its still not working for me  .
Tried IE8's compatibility mode and eveything.
| There are only 10 types of people in this world — those who understand binary, and those who don't. |
|
|
|
|
|
Clear your browser cache and try again
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
A link to the article along with the source code, in the zip file, would be interesting when seeing the code on a later date.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Butler wrote: Is this acceptable?
I don't know. However the first one tells me: "You have the ability to edit this tip/trick"
and the others say "You have the ability to edit or delete this tip/trick"
How would they know that?
Lucky them, I don't feel the urge to edit anything that isn't mine to begin with...
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, it seems strange that people are basically creating Tips/Tricks that say "go check out this other URL". If they aren't adding any substance, it seems pretty useless to me. People could just get that information by googling. Then again, maybe CP would like to have collections of links... don't know the official position on such posts. Like you, I would like to know.
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Butler wrote: Is this acceptable
Not really.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Butler wrote: Welcome to a brand new decade
O no, not again, please.
|
|
|
|
|
Are there any guidelines which suggest whether to delete or modify a question or Tip&Trick? I've just been using my judgement for now, but it would be nice to know if there's something coherent I could go by.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Evicted from under the bridge he was living.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I would like to suggest that a preview is FORCED on anyone below gold status when they post an article. I'm tired of seeing articles posted by (mostly) foreigners (and mostly from India) that have completely ignored the appearance of their article. It's starting to piss me off.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"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." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
I second the idea of enforcing a preview; I would do it everywhere things can be edited.
All it takes is moving the "publish" button to the preview page. Hence:
- the edit page would have "preview" and "cancel" buttons;
- the preview page would have "back to editor", "publish" and "cancel" buttons.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not just the formatting that's a problem, some of the content is just a waste of space. I suppose the alternative is to prevent people below Gold status from using the wizard, but that would add a whole lot of work on the editors. Perhaps we need more editors.
|
|
|
|
|
There's no good answer to the "content problem". I think that's just something we're going to have to deal with anyway. However, the general appearance of the article in terms of formatting can probably be addressed. I think a big part of the problem is that people can copy/paste into the article body field. A lot of the problems I think are because of various sources people use (like Word, or some other word processor that bastardizes the HTML with needless tags and bogus styles.
Maybe the editor should filter out any unsupported tags or style settings for members that haven't reached gold status. However, I think that would probably be the proverbial "rock so big that even god himself cannot lift".
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"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." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
