|
|
But sometimes you do have double standards,
You dont like programming questions in the lounge, but you personally answer questions that could go into sys-admin forum, I know its "not" a programming question but then it does not belong to lounge, just like programming question do not belong to the lounge.
|
|
|
|
|
Hello,
yesterday I've just posted a programming question in the Lounge  .
And I'd like to give you my opinion, maybe can be useful, who knows!
The reason why I posted my message in the Lounge is that I found in the main page of the web site the frame containing some Lounge messages and I said to myself: "Ahh, that's what I'm looking for, let's go"...
From my point of view, you'll have much less message if you, for example, put at the place of the Lounge frame a Message board frame. The probability that a new comer wants to ask a programming question is much more higher then someone who wants to put a new topic in the Lounge.
Bye guys, and thanx to exist (hope to give you back some help!)
Fabio
|
|
|
|
|
|
There's a message "Please do NOT post programming questions to this forum.
For programming help please try the Forums (link)." directly above the text field where you enter the message subject. I'm just curious as to whether you missed this, read it but ignored it, or read it and felt it wasn't clear enough so decided to seek help in the lounge regardless.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I had a look into the Lounge and I finally saw the message. Since when the message is there??? Shame on me...
I really missed it... I even didn't look at the red text!
I'm the kind of people not used to read, but to try . I guess its against guys like me you're fighting.
Fabio
|
|
|
|
|
See, this is basic usability here. Be it a red warning or a bigger page, users never read the documentation!
So I propose the following. I'll admit, it uses a non-standard HTML tag, but most browsers support it these days. It is the "shock" tag. If a post receives 5 or more "1" votes, and is in the Lounge, the user should receive this HTML page upon next visit:
<shock voltage="medium"> Please do NOT post programming questions in the lounge!</shock>
Sometimes I feel like I'm a USB printer in a parallel universe.
|
|
|
|
|
There is no reason why being able to see who voted is forbidden.
It would stop a lot of the spurious voting.
Glano perictu com sahni delorin!
|
|
|
|
|
I voted 1 to you. hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
|
Terry O`Nolley wrote:
There is no reason why being able to see who voted is forbidden.
It would stop a lot of the spurious voting.
I've often thought this would be a good idea... but then I remember that there are a lot of petty minded people here who would use this information to make the site a less nice place to visit.
Personally, I'd do away with the voting fullstop, especially in the soapbox... people who get voted low just keep posting the same kind of crap so it obviously doesn't discourage them.
In the programming forums, you rarely see any votes for answers - so you never know whether an answer to a question is useful or a crock of sh*t.
Personally, I'd prefer to be able to block certain users messages from appearing, that way I can ignore the people who post stuff I don't enjoy reading.
Michael
But you know when the truth is told,
That you can get what you want or you can just get old,
Your're going to kick off before you even get halfway through.
When will you realise... Vienna waits for you? - "The Stranger," Billy Joel
|
|
|
|
|
Michael P Butler wrote:
Personally, I'd prefer to be able to block certain users messages from appearing, that way I can ignore the people who post stuff I don't enjoy reading.
May be some one else is ready to enjoy the stuff... When the author is ready to post the message... there is some other person ready to read the same
There is nothing new under the sun,
But there are lots of old things we don't know.
- Ambrose Bierce
|
|
|
|
|
S P S wrote:
May be some one else is ready to enjoy the stuff...
I don't mean block for everybody, each user should be able to set which posters they want to read or not read.
Michael
But you know when the truth is told,
That you can get what you want or you can just get old,
Your're going to kick off before you even get halfway through.
When will you realise... Vienna waits for you? - "The Stranger," Billy Joel
|
|
|
|
|
Michael P Butler wrote:
each user should be able to set which posters they want to read or not read
So.... the user will have the forums without their 'unwanted posts'?? Is that what you are talking about??
There is nothing new under the sun,
But there are lots of old things we don't know.
- Ambrose Bierce
|
|
|
|
|
S P S wrote:
So.... the user will have the forums without their 'unwanted posts'?? Is that what you are talking about??
Yes. Each user should be able to maintain their own "ignore list"
Michael
But you know when the truth is told,
That you can get what you want or you can just get old,
Your're going to kick off before you even get halfway through.
When will you realise... Vienna waits for you? - "The Stranger," Billy Joel
|
|
|
|
|
Slashdot.org has something like this, and it works well for me:
Registered users can mark another user as a friend, or a foe. Messages from my "friends" are sent to the top of the pile, and messages from my "foes" are sent to the bottom of the pile.
My list of friends and foes is public knowledge available to anyone viewing my profile. I can also see those that have marked me as a friend or a foe.
|
|
|
|
|
Voting allows me to say "thanks" or "lol" or "what crap" without having to reply (which is slow)
|
|
|
|
|
For forum ratings it would cause horrible flame wars (hey you, why did you vote me "1" !)
But for article ratings it would be very helpful. If I knew who rated my article as "poor", I could ask him what is wrong with it. Usually people are too lazy to post a comment after reading two pages of text and find it is crap, so they rate the article "poor" - and I don't know what exactly they mean, so I can't correct the article. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corinna John wrote:
I could ask him what is wrong with it. Usually people are too lazy to post a comment
do you think that they will post the reason even if you ask them ???
|
|
|
|
|
Mr.Prakash wrote:
do you think that they will post the reason even if you ask them
If the person really wants to vote you down in the articles... he/she will / should have to reason it
There is nothing new under the sun,
But there are lots of old things we don't know.
- Ambrose Bierce
|
|
|
|
|
S P S wrote:
If the person really wants to vote you down in the articles... he/she will / should have to reason it
Yeah i agree, but do you think that the downvoter will give you a reason if you ask for a reason?;P
|
|
|
|
|
Let the system allow the user to poll, only after the user posts a comment.
There is nothing new under the sun,
But there are lots of old things we don't know.
- Ambrose Bierce
|
|
|
|
|
Then you would get a comment something like this.
"I didnt like this"
"Useless"
"sucks"
"wtf"
|
|
|
|
|
you get what u deserve 
There is nothing new under the sun,
But there are lots of old things we don't know.
- Ambrose Bierce
|
|
|
|
|
What i mean to say that, if you force someone to post a reply when he votes, these kinda nonsence replies will be there instead of constructive critisiism.
And ppl who really wants to give a constructive critisism do give one.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
