|
Chris Maunder wrote: We'll make it so you don't get points for bookmarking your own. I've also adjusted points a little.
Cool. Btw I don't see any change in my organizer score. Is there a background task that updates the score when you change the scoring pattern?.
|
|
|
|
|
We need to do a full repopulate of the data. Ironing out the last few issues at the moment. We'll then do a test run, do some sanity checks, make sure Luc's and John's rep values are wildly change in inconsistent ways, then deploy to everyone else.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: make sure Luc's and John's rep values are wildly change in inconsistent ways, then deploy to everyone else.
Missed my chance... 
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: We need to do a full repopulate of the data. Ironing out the last few issues at the moment. We'll then do a test run, do some sanity checks, make sure Luc's and John's rep values are wildly change in inconsistent ways, then deploy to everyone else.
Alright, thanks Chris. And yeah please do mess with Luc's and John's reputation points - they both that. 
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: However I haven't noticed any sudden rise in points
That's because we haven't added these retroactively yet.
Luc Pattyn wrote: that is 10 times more than any other organizational action. This is complete nonsense
Please see my comments to John[^]
I have also adjusted some of these values.
Luc Pattyn wrote: Once again it is unclear whether a rep color factors in, and if so, which one
Descriptions will be enhanced.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Organizer points appear to be on the mend! Woot!
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"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." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
You are aware Organizer is to be considered a negative quality? by getting more Org points you are moving away from CG.
|
|
|
|
|
I'd like to have disorganizer-points awarded for messing things up.
"I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by." (DNA)
|
|
|
|
|
you really ought to try harder.
|
|
|
|
|
If you are talking about a positive change then based on recent changes bookmarking anyones article would award you some org points too.
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm, I don't see the correlation between bookmarking and being an organizer, but... ummm... okay.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"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." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
"Organiser" means you help organise the content. This can be by selecting new tags for an article (on the feature list), voting it as good or bad, or bookmarking it - the ultimate expression that it is of value to you in some way.
Think about how many articles you vote for, and how many you bookmark. It takes a lot more to bookmark an article. We can then look at the bookmark count for each article and use that to provide information on how useful an article is. You have, in effect, helped us organise the content into "good" and "other".
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
The points are all a little (and for you, I mean a teeny tiny amount compared to your total) out of whack. We've introduced new points (as you know), changed their value a little, and will soon recalculate the entire rep history to retroactively add in previous actions for which points are now awarded.
If all goes well all you will notice is a change in your points for the better.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: If all goes well all you will notice is a change in your points for the better.
One can only hope.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"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." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: and will soon recalculate the entire rep history to retroactively add in previous actions for which points are now awarded.
Que the "why has my rep dropped by 90%" posts in 5... 4...
3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|
|
Now Button caption as "Submit your answers", i think it should be "Submit your Votes" or "Submit"
|
|
|
|
|
When answering surveys you are selecting (or providing via text box) answers that best match your thoughts on a question. They are not necessarily votes.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I have just posted an article and 3 matters arose which I wanted to tell you about:
1) If you fill in the first page (Naming and setup), press the "Next, article uploads" button and then for whatever reason decide to stop and start again later, you find that the basename you used has been created, and when you try again you get a "basename already in use" error and have to think of a new name.
2) I couldn't find the "skill level" selector on page 1 anywhere, although it is mentioned in the notes
3) I submitted a large article by preparing it as HTML first, selecting the "bare HTML <>" button on the subission page and pasting the whole lot in. When I pressed <> again to return to WYSIWYG view I found I could edit anything. I had to keep returning to the HTML view to make changes - made even more difficult because the cursor positions of the two views appear to be independant.
Apart from that - it's a great site and I use it very often.
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
If you look at Dave's homepage he has three articles listed with the same title. Click on each one and two would appear to be 'ghosts', with only the middle one linking to the real article. I saw the same thing on someone else's homepage earlier today (federico strati I think).
Just say 'NO' to evaluated arguments for diadic functions! Ash
|
|
|
|
|
really? I see two, one on Reparse Points, one on Command Pattern. FF3.6.10
|
|
|
|
|
I see four, one on Reparse Points and three on Command Pattern. :Google Chrome.
Just say 'NO' to evaluated arguments for diadic functions! Ash
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks guys. I'm not a CodeProject regular and didn't realise I could delete the oddballs myself on the "my articles" page, which I have now done.
I seem to remember reporting the same problem when I submitted the article on reparse points way back when. It would be nice if an article and its basename (.aspx page name) wasn't actually cast in stone until a bit later in the creation process, to allow the writer to change his/her mind. Or alternatively, if an article exists from the moment the first page is filled in and the basename defined, then the author should be able to then come back to that article and complete it, but as far as I know that isn't possible either - you can't edit an article until the final text page as been completed - or am I wrong?
However I imagine that such upgrades would require fundamental changes to the way CP works, so I guess we live with it.
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
I have not used the article wizard so cannot answer your questions. However, there is an alternative, and that is to download the article template, create the article on your own PC and then email the finished product. After publication you are still able to re-download the sources and resubmit with any changes you want.
Just say 'NO' to evaluated arguments for diadic functions! Ash
|
|
|
|
|
what you can do is fill each page of the Article Submission scheme, entering only a very short preliminary article body, and ticking the "Do not publish, still composing" checkbox. That will keep most others from seeing your article-to-be. Now you can return and finish it later at your leisure. I do agree, it goes wrong if you abort the process midway.
|
|
|
|
|
1. This is a known issue because we allow members to start, and then come back to, half completed articles (they are in "composiing" status, as opposed the alternative status some of our extremely old articles are in). A better wizard is being planned which should solve this.
2. Good catch - I will fix the wording
3. This is, unfortunately, one of those things that the web does poorly. Trying to synchronise the code and design views (which are two completely different objects under the hood) has defeated us.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
