|
Hi admins,
I was thinking: why not adding a captcha image when a new user wants to sign up? Some spam (not all, however) is probably posted by a spam bot: adding a captcha prevents a bot to sign up. Of course, a human could create the account for the spam bot, but still, adding a captcha would at least reduce the number of spam posts/spam accounts.
|
|
|
|
|
This would add an annoyance to 99.99% (or whatever) of legit users for the sake of spammers, with the biggest issue being that we already have anti-bot technology in place and spammers are not always bots.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
What about adding phone no. verification? The reason is, some one can have many email accounts just in a minute but can't have phone nos like this.If some account gets blocked,that no. should also be blocked.This can be helpful to prevent Abuse/Spam more effectively.
Mechanism can be implemented if some one again tries to use that no. e.g. Admin can grant access (on request) to use that number with another sign up.
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad
|
|
|
|
|
Would not work. Making up a phone number is trivial and the admins can't ring them all to verify whether or not a number is genuine.
|
|
|
|
|
No need to ring them all. e.g. someone try to sign up for new account than he/she will be asked to enter phone no. After that,verification code will be sent and only after successful verification of the sent code,the account will get activated.
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad
|
|
|
|
|
And for those who don't have messaging capabilities on their phone? How do you differentiate? What about people like me who distrust handing out numbers? You have just alienated me by requiring my phone number.
|
|
|
|
|
It's okay Pete, I'll just forward your number from NCA database of known associates of "The Flockfather".
speramus in juniperus
|
|
|
|
|
I would not sign up to this site if it required a phone number.
I don't fill out any sort of form online that requires a mobile number.
Plus, how much would it cost CP to text 10 million phones all over the world?
“I believe that there is an equality to all humanity. We all suck.” Bill Hicks
|
|
|
|
|
But then surely you would have to validate if the construct to a number is correct with the corresponding country? As I know with the UK the number can vary in length depending on the area code.
Every day, thousands of innocent plants are killed by vegetarians.
Help end the violence EAT BACON
|
|
|
|
|
That can be tackled based on the selected country. Gmail works the same way with Two step verification.
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad
|
|
|
|
|
You could use this one[^]
speramus in juniperus
|
|
|
|
|
Chris,
I suggest you make it clearer on the settings page that for the Google and Linkedin, only the ID number is required.
I have noticed a few users that have copied and pasted the the full url, which then gets stripped of symbols (:/.) by your backend to just a long string, which means the urls don't work.
(either that or you smarten up the logic to parse out just the ID).
e.g. look at this users Google+ and LinkedIn links: http://www.codeproject.com/script/Membership/View.aspx?mid=9506038[^] Clicking the G+ link will give a 404.
Cheers,
|
|
|
|
|
Currently, we can only vote to remove forum messages using the red report flag. But I think it would be useful to have an option to vote to move a message to a more appropriate forum, for example if someone posts a programming question in the Lounge, we can vote to move it to the appropriate programming forum.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi ProgramFox,
I have been "advocating" the idea that CP members with a certain Rep rank (as Authority ?) could move specific types of questions from such language specific forums as "C#" to the QA forums for some time now. While believing that would be a "good thing," I am also aware that empowering certain users with such a privilege could generate its own set of problems.
There's been a lot of discussion about forum "identity" issues on this forum.
I believe that Chris, and the CP staff, are thinking hard about the future organization of the forums; one long-term CP member commented Chris was considering having only one type of forum.
If there were to be only one type of forum, my preference would be to have all forums have the facilities now found in QA forums ... facilities for commenting, voting, OP selecting the response they think most useful, etc.
The only thing I am certain of is that CP will evolve, and I trust Chris and CP staff to, moving slowly and prudently, address forum identity issues in a way best for all 10 million+ of "us."
bill
Google CEO, Erich Schmidt: "I keep asking for a product called Serendipity. This product would have access to everything ever written or recorded, know everything the user ever worked on and saved to his or her personal hard drive, and know a whole lot about the user's tastes, friends and predilections." 2004, USA Today interview
|
|
|
|
|
Why am i getting this?Refer this snapshot and look at "Logoff from other places" button.
http://s20.postimg.org/gh1f4f665/10_4_2013_5_42_22_PM.png[^]
I clicked that and its no more there. I am not logged in any where else.
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad
modified 4-Oct-13 8:25am.
|
|
|
|
|
The button means that there're still logged on session cookies. You'll get that button if you log on in two different browsers. You'll also get that button if your browser stops working and if you restart it and log on again: the previous session cookie still exist when you created a new.
modified 4-Oct-13 13:26pm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just started happening. Articles, etc ... where radial tick would be ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
How is it now? (Maybe try Ctrl+F5)
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
The stars are back and there's no latent "reason" input prompt anymore. One thing still slightly askance is the line continuation phenomenon leaves the text "Rate:" on the previous line while the stars are now somewhat awkwardly in the center of the next line; all in all making a normal header space on the page fat.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm assuming IE8, right?
Can I ask, with all respect, why you're using IE8?
We're *this* close to halting all support for IE8 and below but I know there are still plenty of users and I really would like to know why. Chrome and Firefox both work on XP SP2 and they are far, far superior to IE8.
Again: not judging, just puzzled.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
IE8 works. Upgrading involves running the gauntlet of new features. Just not worth the aggrevation. I did upgrade once, as I recall, and I couldn't disable ClearType, or some other glaring disfunction made me instantly uninstall it.
If I try again, it'll be for just this reason ... the dreaded double asterix!
And I'll surely be sad for days after the capitulation ... 
|
|
|
|
|
Some things need to be let go.
IE8 is one of them.
Be strong.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately, here, the browser is set by IT fiat.
It is normalized for the generic user, not for "power users"/developers!
(Still on IE8  )
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
