|
I'm trying really hard to moderate my language, and all I get is $*%@^&" criticism! 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Your message just happened to combine words that have been seen in spam messages in the past, hence it was flagged for approval instead of automatically being posted.
Lucky or unlucky - you decide.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I added a feature to my sample in A Working TCP Client and Server With SSL but when I log in to CodeProject and try to edit the article to describe the change, the submission wizard responds "Unfortunately you do not have permission to edit this article". I've sucessfully done this before, and on the face of it nothing is different this time (famous last words...), but I'm certainly getting different behavior.
Can anyone suggest what might be wrong?
|
|
|
|
|
There was weirdness in author association. I've whacked it a few times so please try again.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Seems to be fixed, thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Just noticed the orange arrow "Parent message" feature.
Very nice! 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Nice touch? The site is down than and when ... if I would do something like this [edit] in an productive environement [/edit] with our customers they would kill me...
Sorry, but at the moment it looks like beginners are at work here.
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I suspect they have major problems, plus it's very early on a Saturday in Canadia!
They seem to be trying to fix it - hence the outages - so give 'em a chance!
For a site of this complexity, with this many hourly visitors, I think they do damn well to get the high percentage up-time that they do - and can forgive the occasional "beyond control" problem.
Heck, they get better reliability than I do from my single PC!
And it's a nice touch - it's handy when you get a long thread.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
I dont now something like "early on a Saturday".... just figting with similar Problems in China and south amercia
Yep, CP do a a good Job, no doubt about this.
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
It's been around for quite a while.
Can't remember when I asked for it, but at least a year or so.
|
|
|
|
|
Oooh, that is nice 
|
|
|
|
|
You are getting old a bit - it is there since end of January...
Bugs and Suggestions - CodeProject[^]
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Or he was just focusing on his back to back threads here - this is the 4th one in a row. I think the site staff know what's going on and are just humoring him at this point. 
|
|
|
|
|
January 2015, even.
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't want him to take too hard...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
I believe Griff has a lot thicker skin than that.
|
|
|
|
|
If you reject QA material, it goes to QA and is marked as edited by you!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
It goes to QA as available or closed? (should be the latter)
You are, in effect, editing the post. Your action in reporting it is closing it, so you've edited it.
(and yeah, I get this doesn't always seem to make the most sense. Your thoughts?)
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
It was as available, I think (I've slept since then!)
But...that may have been an artifact of the "QA has vanished" effect we had on Saturday.
I don't think the act of letting a message through is editing: it's moderating in the same way as we moderate articles, so we aren't changing it - just correcting a "false positive" in the detector.
And if we vote it as "spam, delete that sucker!" then it should never appear in QA anyway, so it's sensible to mark it as edited as that gives an audit trail of who-did-what-to-which.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
We're starting to get a lot of posts where they are hiding the links in punctuation - so it isn't immediately obvious that it's spam when you look at the "formatted" message. In fact I've just found that I let a number of such posts through because they looked normal (judging by the editor credits) 
This spammer for example: Member 12425589 - Professional Profile - CodeProject[^]
Could we have a optional HTML view (or better a "this contains links with no real text" indicator)?
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Wow. That's sneaky. Useless you accidentally stumble on it with the pass of a mouse you'll never see it.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah - so you read it in moderation and it looks fine, so you let it through...
I wonder if Chris could run a direct SQL search for href tags with a single character link text (other than '^' obviously)?
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
What if we highlighted links in the text?
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
This has a link at the period.
This too but it is highligthed.
Still hard to detect.
Especially when the link text is just a space where highlighting does not help.
Even a single letter filter would not help with the above sentence. It contains two links where the link text contains multiple characters.
|
|
|
|
|
I've highlighted the links using background-color:yellow in the moderation pages. It shows up pretty clearly.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
