|
|
Should i upload it again by using update your article wizard?
|
|
|
|
|
No don't. Give them some time please. They will update your article soon.
|
|
|
|
|
Your article is safe and sound and OK. It is in our submission queue and it is the next one in line.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
Thank You!! 
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/3968138/Re-Greetings.aspx
When I view that message, the "Popular" star is part of the anchor (link), so it has a border around the image.
Martin Fowler wrote: Any fool can write code that a computer can understand. Good programmers write code that humans can understand.
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed - will have a new release this afternoon or tomorrow.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I posed this question in the Lounge as a result of Nish's post about getting someone auto-banned.
What are the criteria used to determine if an auto-ban is appropriate? My thought is that anybody could become a victim of auto-banning if eneough users got together to make it happen, say, to Nish, Christian, myself, or even Chris. What safeguards are in place to ensure something like this doesn't happen?
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"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
|
|
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure members can be restored, so if it did happen, it wouldn't be the end of the world. Though, I do wonder if sock puppet accounts could be created by a single person to continually ban a member... that'd be annoying.
I agree, there should be minimum requirements to report other members. Say, a certain reputation level and no history of abuse (e.g., if 20% of votes received are down votes, they are probably an abusive member).
Martin Fowler wrote: Any fool can write code that a computer can understand. Good programmers write code that humans can understand.
|
|
|
|
|
I was thinking along the lines of a final ban approval by a site admin for users of a certain reputation level where a significant percentage of their rep points were earned in the important categories, such as Authority, Author, Organizer, Editor, and Participant.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"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
|
|
|
|
|
If the profile being reported is Platinum or above in 1 category or Gold or above in 2 categories, then the auto-ban should require admin approval. That should be a fairly decent fix to this problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Only Silver and above members can report members. Those members that are inadvertently closed can be opened easily.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Only Silver and above members can report members. Those members that are
inadvertently closed can be opened easily.
Don't you have an exception for even site staff? As in if 5 silver members report say you, Smitha or Sean, you'd be auto-removed? [I know it's trivial to bring the profile back, but still allowing that seems weird]
|
|
|
|
|
It's trivial to fix if that scenario happens (or, indeed, if it could happen  ).
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: or, indeed, if it could happen
Is that in invitation to try and disable your account?
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
|
|
|
|
|
|
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Better not think about doing it. The hamsters have nukes.
Signature construction in progress. Sorry for the inconvenience
|
|
|
|
|
You're not the 1st person to worry about this. Not sure I am either, but the silver or better requirement was added a short time after I emailed my concerns. I didn't want to post publicly since it might give some of the usual suspects bad ideas if I was right in my suspicions about the lack of protection in place at the time.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
|
|
|
|
|
I suggested the following in my response to John:
If the profile being reported is Platinum or above in 1 category or Gold or above in 2 categories, then the auto-ban should require admin approval. That should be a fairly decent fix to this problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nagy Vilmos wrote: It's getting hard to find new ones; for now.
Don't panic, there will be others. 
"I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by." (DNA)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Splatted already.
Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done.
Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H
OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre
I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer
Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
