|
Thank you, you didn't need to do that.
I copied-and-pasted the code from VS to the message, selected, and clicked encode. Win7, VS 2010, IE8.
After that I selected again and clicked code.
|
|
|
|
|
|
No. It's an entry into the LightswLightSwitch Star Contest[^]. It's a pretty unusual contest as far as CP goes, but this is allowed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OK, thanks thatraja!
Espen Harlinn
Senior Architect, Software - Goodtech Projects & Services
|
|
|
|
|
In a brilliantly self-referential meta-commentary: [^]
AspDotNetDev has, I believe, raised an issue the metaphysical "depth" of which is so blindingly awesome it may even eclipse, temporarily, our on-going obsession with "rep scores."
I believe in the fundamental rights of a person to have as many personalities as they need, which does not mean I don't feel compassion for someone who has multiple personalities, and believes there is something "wrong" about themself(ves); or that I don't feel compassion for those who have one (personality), and are, perhaps, haunted by a sense they are missing out.
From my point of view, as an ex-psychotherapist, if a person is troubled by who they (is) are, and wishes to change from pluralistic to singular, or versa-vice, that's a matter of personal choice. And, if they are happy with their multiple or unary personality(ies), great !
Discrimination against people with multiple personalities, expressed in such epithets as "sock-puppets," etc., are, thankfully, a form of bigotry we are now discarding in common usage; unless, of course, said "sock-puppets" are created for some insidious purpose, are not truly "organic" expressions of the Self. And, in the case of "perverse intention:" we righteously condemn said perpetrators of iniquity: yea, may their accounts be deleted.
On the technical level though, I think this comment raises an important issue for CodeProject: should there be a special registration mechanism for those who feel their "organic" multiple personalities are so distinct so unique, that each should have a separate CP account.
Which raises other technically complex issues: what if "Personality A," and "Personality B," post identical posts ? Are they then guilty of cross-posting ? What if "Personality X" demands that all personalities should have a combined reputation score ? What if "A" reports "B" to CP as an "impostor" ?
Note that even touching on the issue of "impostoring" almost demands we need a portmanteau to be added to our common technical parlance: "imposter" ?
best, Bill
"Science is facts; just as houses are made of stones: so, is science made of facts. But, a pile of stones is not a house, and a collection of facts is not, necessarily, science." Henri Poincare
|
|
|
|
|
So what is the bug and/or suggestion?
Just along for the ride.
"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
"It is the celestial scrotum of good luck!" - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
|
|
|
|
|
You'll have to ask his alter-ego.
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: So what is the bug and/or suggestion?
imho the possible tsunami of bug reports and/or suggestions that may occur in the future related to this issue is such an unknown, that I must regard my first post here on this issue as equivalent to the "Martian Rover" probe. An attempt to establish basic parameters.
But, in an era in which a Richard Stallman can say: "Facebook does massive surveillance. If there is a ‘like’ button in a page, Facebook knows who visited that page. And it can get IP address of the computer visiting the page even if the person is not a Facebook user. So you visit several pages that have ‘like’ button and Facebook knows that you visited all of those, even if it doesn’t really know who you are."
Is there any meaning "left" in the term, "paranoid hyper-vigilance" ?
The "suggestion" is: that we (collectively) consider the issue. fyi: I am using the pronoun "we" here to indicate the members of CP, not a hypothetical collection of personalities within one physical body, just in case the context of this thread may imply otherwise.
best, Bill
"Science is facts; just as houses are made of stones: so, is science made of facts. But, a pile of stones is not a house, and a collection of facts is not, necessarily, science." Henri Poincare
|
|
|
|
|
This makes my head hurt. Or at least it would, if it wasn't stuffed with someone's hand.
|
|
|
|
|
That is a deliciously surreal reply ! +5
"Science is facts; just as houses are made of stones: so, is science made of facts. But, a pile of stones is not a house, and a collection of facts is not, necessarily, science." Henri Poincare
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: should there be a special registration mechanism for those who feel their "organic" multiple personalities are so distinct so unique, that each should have a separate CP account
I can't see we need to provide anything different than what's already here. Each personality can and should fill out a separate sign up form.
BillWoodruff wrote: what if "Personality A," and "Personality B," post identical posts ? Are they then guilty of cross-posting ?
It depends. If they each post the same message in different forums from the same account, then that's cross posting. If they post from different accounts then it's not (psychologically) since it's two different personalities posting two messages. No different than if two people who knew each other posted separate entries.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
fair dinkum, as always, Chris !
thanks, Bill
"Science is facts; just as houses are made of stones: so, is science made of facts. But, a pile of stones is not a house, and a collection of facts is not, necessarily, science." Henri Poincare
|
|
|
|
|
I don't get it. he used the same account to reply to himself. He did not use a 2nd account there.
|
|
|
|
|
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: I don't get it.
Neither do I.
Just along for the ride.
"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
"It is the celestial scrotum of good luck!" - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: Neither do I.
Glad to hear that. I bet it's because we think at a higher intellectual level than these other guys here. 
|
|
|
|
|
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: I bet it's because we think at a higher intellectual level
I agree to this line of thinking, completely. We are highly intelligent creatures who happen to have a great disdain for bad movies. 
Just along for the ride.
"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
"It is the celestial scrotum of good luck!" - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
|
|
|
|
|
Majikthise and Vroomfondel are you? You are quite definitely here as representatives of the Amalgamated Union of Philosophers, Sages, Luminaries and Other Thinking Persons
|
|
|
|
|
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: He did not use a 2nd account there.
Nishant-ji,
That is exactly the beautiful subtlety of the problem-space outlined by AspDotNetDev's self-referential meta-post ! A problem space which, by the way, may be NP-incomplete.
I never said, in my original post, that our esteemed colleague was using more than one account; I raised the issue of using, or appearing to use, more than one personality, and began to explore the possible implications of a case where someone who "manifests" with more than one personality may wish to have multiple accounts, by accident, or by intention, and what that would mean for CP.
As it is now, someone who had multiple personalities which were "mutually exclusive," might have more than one personality register on CP, completely unaware that, in their other personalities, they had already registered: if using the same e-mail address for registration, perhaps even the same password: this would now be flagged as "using multiple accounts," which I think is against the code of CP.
Yet, suppose: that, in "Personality A," the person was a major contributor to excellent answers on QA, but, that, in "Personality B," the person contributed excellent articles, or was a major Lounge mouth-piece frequently up-voted for filling the Lounge with stale jokes over thirty years old ? Surely we would not want to lose either contribution ?
best, Bill
"Science is facts; just as houses are made of stones: so, is science made of facts. But, a pile of stones is not a house, and a collection of facts is not, necessarily, science." Henri Poincare
|
|
|
|
|
Griff and Espen are the same person?  Wow, who knew?
|
|
|
|
|
Do you even know what you are talking about? Because, I sure as hell don't.
Just along for the ride.
"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
"It is the celestial scrotum of good luck!" - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
|
|
|
|
|
It's in the way he tells 'em.
|
|
|
|
|
I got tired of the FireFox memory leaks (all recent versions), so I switched to Opera (V11.60).
And now the CP linkifier does not work at all: pasting a URL in a forum message does not perform any magic at all.
In fact, all paste magic seems absent; on the positive side, the rather annoying "Paste as text, code block, HTML text, ..." stuff does not show either.
My new posts won't have many links...
|
|
|
|
|
No Chrome?
Just along for the ride.
"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
"It is the celestial scrotum of good luck!" - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
