|
If you're still thinking about breaking articles up (for display purposes) into multiple pages, I was wondering if it would help to define a custom HTML tag - say, <PAGE> - to allow authors/editors to indicate preferred break points? That way the scripts might do a better job of pagination.
|
|
|
|
|
Great minds 
I was thinking a <pagebreak /> tag or something. I was also thinking of adding a pagination control that members would be able to use to select better page breaks. I still want to have paged articles as an option (especially for when I'm browsing on mobile) but the thought of trying to write a script to automatically break free-form HTML into a 'standard page length' is disheartening.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
The Algorithms board is suffering from a rash of badly phrased questions. Unlike the other question boards, the Algorithms board doesn't have a sticky with suggestions for forum etiquette. Would it be worth having a sticky that suggests how to phrase/not phrase a question so that the chances of receiving an answer are maximized?
It won't discourage all bad posters, but even if it stops one or two it would have done its job.
|
|
|
|
|
Sometimes when I post a message to a new author's article, I tell him to email CP, using the "submit" email address, if he has questions regarding use of HTML tags, etc. Maybe it would be better to have a separate email address for this purpose. (You probably don't want to use your personal addresses.)
I suggest something like "help" or maybe "article" at codeproject dot com.
Maybe the questions sent to this mailbox could be listed on a special web page/forum, and member volunteers could check this page, and answer any questions they can. I know we already have a boatload of forums, but none just for the questions that new authors ask.
My personal opinion is that questions coming from new authors have a higher priority than questions in other forums, in the sense that these guys are now trying to contribute to CP, and this might be the first interaction with the community.
|
|
|
|
|
I think this ties in with the other stuff you've suggested.
Speaking of 'the other stuff', I'm getting Sean to put everything together tomorrow and start getting the new section setup. I apologise that it may seem like I'm dragging my feet, but I'm actually rushing this through ahead of a dozen other things that have piled up. It's too important to ewait.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
OK, thanks for letting me know, I wasn't sure.
|
|
|
|
|
The Soapbox link in the Message Boards menu links to the Back Room, is this intentional? I thought the Back Room was supposed to be hidden...
|
|
|
|
|
1 - in your list of current bugs, you say: Updates to our advertising system so we can try and now show you ads you may not be interested in. Is that what you meant to say ? :P
2 - I'm not sure if this is what you meant in one of your known bugs, but it doesn't seem to be exactly what I am seeing, so... This has been the case for some time now, but usually only when a thread is many pages long. It's possible to go to a page by hitting next or previous, and the header says 'messages 26-50 of xxxx', but no messages are shown. Some moron posted in the VB forum that he was looking for programmers, and I responded, my response then was the only post that was over the page. I went back to see if anyone had replied, and the second page repeatably came up blank. This doesn't ALWAYS happen when a thread is longer than 2 pages, but that's the main place I've noticed it in the past, so unless a lot of other people replied ( possible ), this is the first time I've seen it happen when that was not the case.
As a matter of fact, right now, in the Back room, every page bar the first, will not load because of this bug.
Christian Graus
Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
modified on Saturday, March 14, 2009 3:44 PM
|
|
|
|
|
1. Fixed. Oops
2. In Normal view or Thread view. If 'Normal' then I've kicked the code again and am hoping I nailed it this time
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris,
Would it be possible to remove that errant message from my profile page[^]? I'd do it myself if I could. I don't know if you also want to consider deleting the associated account.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Done
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, greatly appreciated.
|
|
|
|
|
I think that membership should be based more/entirely on articles, whether or not you've won VIP, and maybe even article contest wins. In other words, completely remove advancement through message count and membership duration as a direct consideration.
My idea is to realign membership status based on a points system.
1 point for each year you've been a member
2 points for every article posted
1 point for each article contest win
5 points for each time you've been awarded VIP
Bronze - 0-30 points
Silver - 31-60 points
Gold - 61-99 points
Platinum - 100 points or more
In my case, I would have the following points:
Membership duration - 8 years = 8
Articles posted - 39 = 78
Article contest wins - 1 = 1
VIP Awards - 3 = 15
------------------------------------
Total Points = 102 (I just *barely* made it to platinum)
These are tangible contributions to the site. Number of messages shouldn't be a consideration for membership level. I would also like to see membership level increases require at least a year of membership between levels. In other words, you would have to be a member for at least a year before being *eligible* for advancement from bronze to silver. In that year's time, you should write articles and otherwise contribute to the site by answering questions in the programming forums so that when your year is up, you can get promoted immediately. This would also mean that in order to reach platinum membership, you would have to be a member for a MINIMUM of three years.
The points system described above would also make it possible for members to achieve platinum status without having to write an article. It would require 17 years of membership and being awarded MVP for each of those years, but it's certainly doable. It would also still promote the creation of articles in order to increase your membership sooner (who wants to wait 17 years to advance?).
"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." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with everything you say. Except one.
Answering questions on the programming forums definitely contributes to the site. Therefore, I would modify what you said with this: messages in the Lounge or Soapbox don't count at all. All other forum posts do count. How they count is TBD.
|
|
|
|
|
*But*, answering questions on the programming forums also contributes to winning MVP. Mere message count is a poor indicator, while recognition of actual help is a tangible *contribution*.
"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." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
I understand what you're saying, but I disagree. In the end, member level is a quantification of service to CP. Message count is specific and countable; MVP status is a judgment call and hence 'soft'.
|
|
|
|
|
It's actually calculated by the site, based on article submission, the quality of programming forum posts, and probably some other stuff. There also appears to be a cap on the number of people that are awarded MVP every year (but I'm not sure about that). I don't think MVP is a "soft" award at all.
I'm trying to point out that more effort on the part of the user should be required to advance, and allowing mere message *count* is not appropriate.
"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." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I hear you. I don't actually know why I'm arguing in favor of including message count, since at the rate I'm going it will be another 10 years before I get to Fixture. 
|
|
|
|
|
A number of members would be reduced in membership level if the system I've suggested is put into place (gold and silver members would be the most affected, along with a handful of platinum members). As for my own personal score, I would not have made platinum until just this last January (2009 MVP award put me just over the top). Anyone with at least 50 articles would have nothing to worry about (that includes you, btw).
BTW, I was scrolling through the who's who list, and noticed there's a bronze member with over 20 articles posted, and 4 years as a member. Why isn't he a gold?
"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." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: I was scrolling through the who's who list, and noticed there's a bronze member with over 20 articles posted, and 4 years as a member. Why isn't he a gold?
You know, maybe CP needs an archivist, who can track down this arcane trivia, maybe write a book, CodeProject Internals. Or my personal favorite, Hamsters Unleashed: What CodeProject Doesn't Want You To Know.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh great - something for the conspiracy theorists... 
"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." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
I like the idea. I'd have to do some simulations to see who would lose and who would gain, then work out if the losers were bigger at me and would yell, and then adjust accordingly.
But seriously: I do like the points based idea and have been working on revamping the entire system because straight out 'number of articles' doesn't say anything.
However, MVP status is calculated on the articles you post and the rating of the articles as well as the ratings of your answers in the programming forums. My plan was to use the MVP calculation system to generate point for everyone (not just to rank everyone) and so give everyone a more solid idea of how they and everyone else is going (for those that care). Further, I want to award members for as many actions as I can that help another member find an answer:
- posting an article
- answering a question posted on an article
- answering a question in a forum
- voting on articles, questions and answers (this helps
immensely in the job of sorting the good from the bad
- moderating programming content
There is also scope to have a separate points system that is purely for community participation. Have you joined collaborative groups, have you been a Nishbot, have you moved messages into the correct forums, have you hung around for a long time
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I figured that awarding of MVP (which already has math behind it regarding message counts/quality) was what I call a "tangible". You don't really want to expose the criteria for calculating MVP, so just the fact that someone *is* awarded should be enough, and is visible in the user's profile. My idea was formatted in such a way as to create as little *new* work as possible for you. It also presents an easy job for Joe Sixpack users to verify their own status without having to bother you.
You already know my opinion on user level - it should be earned, and difficult to earn. Under the system I proposed, many users will find that they have been "demoted" by at least one level (and I suspect a lot of gold members would become Bronze as a result).
"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." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
OK - I'd be a loser here, and I'm definitely bigger than you Chris. I'd have a grand total of 38 points.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: I'd be a loser here
start yelling, I'll join you. Chris asked for it after all. 
The basic idea seems sound, but clearly the 31 and 61 thresholds John proposed are too high, there should be more of an exponential curve there.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google
- the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get
- use the code block button (PRE tags) to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
