|
lounge came to mind, but "testing" comes close to "programming" ... hence my question here. Don't worry I'll figure my problem out; somehow. 
V.
|
|
|
|
|
You could also post in "Application Lifecycle", however I haven't seen any real activity there yet.
I don't think you would get lynched when posting in the Lounge, especially as the weekend is near.
|
|
|
|
|
Two days ago I discovered the forum message pinning was functioning again, after a long period of unavailability. Yesterday and today, it again fails to perform its magic. Please fix this, it is a great feature to have when a thread grows.
|
|
|
|
|
It's working perfectly for me...
Browser?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
The browser I use most of the time is FireFox 3.0.19; today's investigation seems to indicate it is the only one around here that fails on CP forum pinning. When I try IE7, FF3.6.8, or Chrome, it works well.
It probably stopped working on FF3.0 around here[^], and hasn't ever since, till last Sunday.
I have no clue what could have caused it to fail and later to succeed, and now fail again.
I guess I'll move on to FF3.6.8 now (I don't ever want the latest most popular), so as far as I'm concerned the relevance of the pin bug is small.
However I now have two questions, you're not getting away that easily
1.
is there a way to prevent FF3.6.8 to open a new tab at a random position? when I click a CP link (the new tab variety), on older FF up to 3.0 I get the new tab at the far right, which is fine; doing the same on FF3.6.8 (admittedly, another machine and OS), the new tab can appear just anywhere, most often at the leftmost-but-one position.
[ADDED]
Q1 solved: about:config, browser.tabs.insertRelatedAfterCurrent=false
for me FF3.0 is now a thing of the past.
[/ADDED]
2.
could we please get a new button on the "Edit message" page for suggs&bugs forum, pressing it would stuff the answers to your typical questions (what browser? JavaScript enabled? cookies enabled? ...) right into the message.
TIA
|
|
|
|
|
Could we have a limit to the length of the subject field, say 100 characters, to prevent people from posting ridiculously long titles that scroll over multiple lines? This[^] one's a monster for instance.
|
|
|
|
|
Hear hear.
100 characters on entry, and 1 line on display should suffice.
|
|
|
|
|
How long is 1 line?
Now how long is 1 line deep in a thread with the reader's browser set to take up only half the page width?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
It's currently at 250 characters and to be honest I'm loathe to fiddle with it too much.
0.53% of message subjects in the last month are over 100 characters, and 0.01% are over 200 characters. Changing the limit will affect very, very few members and will solve an issue that is extremely rare, but at the same time I just know someone in the lounge will want to do something ridiculous and potentially amusing and there will be a sad face that day.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
640KB ought to be enough for any subject line.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: someone in the lounge will want to do something ridiculous and potentially amusing and ...
huh?[^]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personally, I'd rather they fixed long-time issues or added features that improve the site's usefulness. Twitter support is (IMHO) pointless.
.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
|
|
|
|
|
Only if they add a "shoot me now before I post completely meaningless drivel" option that will be automatically triggered by this.
|
|
|
|
|
Today, I found that we can 1-vote any question or answer without any mandatory comment.
Is there any specific reason, why are we back to that? With mandatory comments, people were restricted vote 1/2 until they had some decent reason.
Further, the moment you click radio button your vote is casted. Again, I don't find this good for various reasons.
Any further modifications in queue?
|
|
|
|
|
I think a comment was pointless.
Vote 1 and leave a "" comment.
The only thing it did do was leave a calling card, like "Sandeep Mewara Voted You Down, Like a Dog, Go get him!"
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
CCC League Table Link
CCC Link[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: The only thing it did do was leave a calling card, like "Sandeep Mewara Voted You Down, Like a Dog, Go get him!"
Agreed! But, I guess that's good, in a way, as I specified that I downvoted an answer because it was real bad!
Having mandatory comments, puts a check on downvoting. Anyone cannot just vote down everytime with empty or junk comment. People can question and know the reason. We have seen lots of time someone downvotes for wrong reason - others come to know from the reason provided and try to make things right.
If there is no check, then anyone can just go ahead and downvote without any fear or just for fun. Our first motive should be to provide a check and have some control on aggresive & meaningless downvoting. Mandatory comments is surely one of the way.
We can control someone who downvotes with wrong comments all the time but we cannot control downvotes if there are no checks at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: We'll see. Maybe this is a Very Bad Thing.
My opinion - Yes, not good.
Chris Maunder wrote: Maybe we put comments back on answers, but not questions.
Fair enough! What I have observed is, a reason should be provided for downvoting an answer. Will wait for this option to be picked and implemented.
UPDATE: BTW, now I know, I have one more place to keep a watch when things change on this site - your personal message board. 
|
|
|
|
|
We don't have comments in the forums, yet that's OK?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: We don't have comments in the forums, yet that's OK?
No. Not OK.
I usually visit ASP.NET forum. You can see almost every question is downvoted there and at times answers too. Since there is no comment kinda flow, people downvote at their will... Surely answers should have a reason for downvoing.
|
|
|
|
|
You realise that leads to infinite recursion...
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I think you are right, there seems little point in lots of 1-votes each with (effectively) the same comment.
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: With the introduction of the comment requirement the number of votes fell dramatically
I am sure you were talking about 1-votes.
We can have comment just for 1-vote and not for all.
If you really want to stick with the no comments for voting thing, can you just provide an option to challenge the vote and get it fixed in case you don't see a reason for your answer to get down-voted. Something similar to 'Vote to remove message' concept? There are many trolls here already, you know that.
..Go Green..
|
|
|
|
|
There's a spammer[^] in tham thar hills.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
