|
So he's plagiarised your link?
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
Hadn't thought of it that way...Ban the heretic!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
This[^] article is already published, OP has post its revision still why there is no 'already posted' link.
Is it bug or something ? 
Find More .Net development tips at : .NET Tips
The only reason people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure - but if you look, the original is deleted, presumably by the OP (I did a quick check here and didn't see it in the "plagiarised" lists).
I suspect the OP deleted it and reposted to try and get rid of the two negative (but justified) comments at the top of the messages table - they were both downvoted when I saw them, so I countered that. Unfortunately, it doesn't work like that... 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
 
Find More .Net development tips at : .NET Tips
The only reason people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is that last link supposed to be? It leads to an unavailable page.
|
|
|
|
|
It was the link from google Books, How it Is broken ? let me check
Find More .Net development tips at : .NET Tips
The only reason people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
|
|
|
|
|
And now it is mended again. 
|
|
|
|
|
I can see it. don't you ?
Find More .Net development tips at : .NET Tips
The only reason people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, as I said above, it seems OK now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One got through: Html5 Image Markup[^] - Gone
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
modified 4-Jun-16 10:39am.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Mr. OG
Again me, again a question from a noob:
Does the reporting System really makes sense? Especially in a case like this?
You reported "Spammer from moderation queue" and all relevant Messages are gone at that time. I assume also other members especially also "protectors" can not see why the subject is a Spammer.
Summary: In a case like this, it needs 9 blind votes until the member disappears... hard to see the logic...
Like usual, swiss english, but I think you can translate/will understand it
Bruno
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Surprisingly, yes!
The "moderation queue" here is a special one, only visible to some members. Basically, it's a list of all the messages that the automated spam detector is pretty sure are spam, and should be deleted. But... It's not perfect, so in order to make sure every message has to be confirmed as OK or not OK by a human. If it's spam, it's immediately deleted. But the author isn't. So if it's accidental spam, we can refuse it but not close the account. If it's clearly deliberate, we need to book it and it's author as quick as possible to discourage than from trying again.
To close the member account still takes a number of human reports, so we add a report here to speed that up and reduce the number of "goes" they get. Because the message is immediately deleted we can't post a link to it, so yes, we do have to take such reports on faith to an extent. That's partly why we're careful to mark it as "from the moderation queue" because we know that we're asking others to trust us on this.
I think the idea is that only "trusted" members get to make this decision, but we do need something along these lines to prevent the massive spam floods we had last year. Some of those spam bots were posting faster than four or five of us could delete their cr@p, and even with the system in place we've had times this year when there are several hundred spam messages in queue waiting for us to approve or report.
If you can think of a better way to handle this that doesn't remove the human input I'm pretty sure everybody will be happy to hear it!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
First of all, thank you for your detailed answer.
Quote: If you can think of a better way
No, sorry, I don't have a better solution. But in case "Moderators" can delete all relevant Information, why they should not have also the possibility to remove the member also?
[Edit]
Still the question remains: Why 9 blind reports are necessary. It does not really prove/confirm anything.
Not a big thing, only my minds...
Bruno
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I assume it's because the Hamsters don't want to give anyone the power to "kill" a member with a headshot.
And I'm pretty glad of that ... the temptation to remove annoying ones might prove irresistible
(And before you get your back up, that doesn't include you, or anyone else on this page! Some of the QA stuff though ... a real life hit could be Chlorine in the gene pool )
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
0x01AA wrote: But in case "Moderators" can delete all relevant Information,
We are not, we are only volunteers and at the very end we are still users.
We can do some thigns, but actually not that much. The only ones being able to do such actions are the CP-Staff
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 helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Luxury Villas and Apartments in Turkey (in Arabic): Adem Yildirim - Professional Profile - CodeProject[^]
The question subject was fine, but the body just took a quick Google translate to reject!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
