|
In programming forums the "Reply to Message" page now shows instructions in between question and edit box. The net result is I can't read the question and the reply on a single screen, this is not working at all. Also, the instructions weren't supposed to be shown to experienced users.
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
The quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get. Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they improve readability. CP Vanity has been updated to V2.4
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: Reply to Programming Message now very hard
Sounds like you need more instructions.
|
|
|
|
|
This is bugging me as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Let it bug you no longer.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just responded to a post by AspDotNetDev and I have to post my idea here now. It may not be a new idea but I think it deserves some consideration from the community.
An internal, private messaging system to replace the external e-mail system. You can then manage your private messages via an added panel/page in your settings page. This would help keep your anonymity for those of us who are international super spies.
Useful? Just a thought.
--
** Jack of all trades and master of none.
|
|
|
|
|
I recommended something like this, but I'm still not sure Chris understood what I was meant. 
|
|
|
|
|
It was discussed absolutely ages ago.
If I remember correctly [apologies Chris if I am wrong], but Chris didn't want to start taking discussions into the private domain. Its a community project and he wants the chat to remain public. If users want to start discussing in private, then they can use their email for that.
|
|
|
|
|
That's not what he said in the thread I linked to. He said "Allowing members to anonymously contact other members is an invitation for stalking and harrassment." That confused me, because I never said the contact would be anonymous... it would merely be without sharing email addresses.
|
|
|
|
|
No, I am talking about discussions that happened way before that message.
(maybe i dreamt it!)
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, well, that reason doesn't make much sense to me either. Those of us who regularly answer questions know not to keep them private and those who don't know that can still use private messages (even though they include email addresses) to take things offline when they shouldn't.
|
|
|
|
|
Your idea, as I read it, was to use the current private message system but with "the ability to send a private message to a user without another user's email address being revealed".
The current suggestion is for a fully internal message system.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
The number one goal of CodeProject is to help software developers write better code, faster. Forum discussions allow members to have good back-and-forth discussions on development. Questions and Answers allows to-the-point answers to your thorny questions. Articles and tips provide the raw material for research. Ultimately the more material members post the more is available for others to review and learn from.
I'm still not convinced that an internal message system, in the context of helping others, fits in.
Yet.
The issue of stalking, spam etc is something that has always been a concern but I do think it can be overcome given the new systems we've put in place over the last couple of months.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: I'm still not convinced that an internal message system, in the context of helping others, fits in.
Okay. I hear you.
I just think that making a personal beef with someone can be done somewhere else beside the community. I don't think anyone learns from that type of stuff and has nothing to do with the betterment of the site. That is all I was getting at. Thanks for the consideration though. 
--
** Jack of all trades and master of none.
|
|
|
|
|
we may lock that(which has answers) so that we can use answers(also comments) for reference. But don't allow new answer or edit or delete or vote. Just for views.
Don't want to see the message "Sorry, the item you requested could not be found." for answered questions.
|
|
|
|
|
I have no problem deleting a question if it is dumb and unproductive and their are only comments that are reactionary.
I do agree (to a point) that we should not delete questions if they have answers but rather lock them up so to speak and HAVE to give a reason why we locked it up.
I have seen dumb questions with dumb answers and I feel the whole lot should be deleted with no questions asked; doesn't happen all the time but it happens enough for me to notice.
--
** Jack of all trades and master of none.
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: I have seen dumb questions with dumb answers and I feel the whole lot should be deleted with no questions asked; doesn't happen all the time but it happens enough for me to notice.
Agree, CP editors(or eligible members) may do this.
|
|
|
|
|
I do not think it is fair to delete questions unless they are duplicates of previous posts. All others should be commented on or answered as appropriate.
The best things in life are not things.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard MacCutchan wrote: I do not think it is fair to delete questions unless they are duplicates of previous posts. All others should be commented on or answered as appropriate.
I have been instructed by CP staff to delete a post in the past and it wasn't a duplicate post either.
Some questions are not really questions to begin with and they don't deserve to exist; whether they have comments or not. I am not the only member here that feels this way.
As I stated before, I feel that if a question, as dumb or smart as it is, should not be deleted if it has an "answer" attached. Rather it should be "locked". Now, if this question is blatantly abusive, a spam post, etc... then it should be deleted automatically through a 4 or 5 vote requirement system by someone of sufficient standing in the community (rep score or ranking).
my thoughts.
--
** Jack of all trades and master of none.
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: Some questions are not really questions to begin with and they don't deserve to exist;
But only by responding to them can we educate the poster of the error of their ways. I don't think that a bad question does any harm to the community.
I agree that obvious spam and abuse be automatically deleted.
The best things in life are not things.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard MacCutchan wrote: But only by responding to them can we educate the poster of the error of their ways.
I usually edit a question that is poor. I don't delete it. I don't see any reason why a "question" should be in the community if it really isn't a question.
--
** Jack of all trades and master of none.
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: I don't see any reason why a "question" should be in the community if it really isn't a question.
In whose judgement? You may think it's not valid but others may disagree.
The best things in life are not things.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard MacCutchan wrote: In whose judgement? You may think it's not valid but others may disagree.
I guess we agree to disagree on this topic.
--
** Jack of all trades and master of none.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think it is fair to delete them ... period
What, are you running out of disk space?
giuchici
|
|
|
|
|
giuchici wrote: I don't think it is fair to delete them
That's what I'm saying!
The best things in life are not things.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
