|
Well it does not happen with me. I am using 1.5.0.4
|
|
|
|
|
It was the Tabbed Browser Extensions!
I've disabled it, and it now works fine...
It's rather disappointing, cos I liked the extension.
Mahen
|
|
|
|
|
It would be good to have one since I happen to search a lot at CP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Could you please eliminate the ability to give 1 to a post, unless sender describes his/her reason?
Like Windows 2003 that we have to explain the reason to shutdown a server, it might be good not to be permited to give a 1, unless we define a good reason, at least this way, we understand that the 1 has a true reason or not, if Like a usual message the reason will be published globally.
//This is not a signature
while (I'm_alive) {
printf("I Love Programming");
}
-- modified at 6:59 Tuesday 13th June, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
Then, 2 becomes 1; we need to give reasons for 2...
Then, 3 becomes 1; we need to give reasons for 3...
Then...
So we need to give reasons for every vote. We can't vote any more.
- It's easier to make than to correct a mistake.
|
|
|
|
|
Voting is a fundamental pillar of western civilisation. To be denied the ability to vote would be a gross injustice.
Voltaire (1694-1778) wrote: I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it.
Jörgen Sigvardsson , on the subject of Wikipedia, wrote: Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least you have the chance to correct the wiki.
|
|
|
|
|
I never saied "Deny the ability to vote"
//This is not a signature
while (I'm_alive) {
printf("I Love Programming");
}
|
|
|
|
|
Hamed Mosavi wrote: I never saied "Deny the ability to vote"
Actually, you did say that, even if you didn't realise that you did. You said "Could you please eliminate the ability to give 1 to a post, unless sender describes his/her reason?". If the person doesn't want to give a reason they would be denied the ability to vote the message.
The buttons 1 to 5 are voting buttons - That is why, when you press one it says
Voted: 5
Scottish Developers upcoming sessions include:
.NET debugging, tracing and instrumentation by Duncan Edwards Jones and Code Coverage in .NET by Craig Murphy
My: Website | Blog
-- modified at 2:37 Wednesday 14th June, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
So, it might be probably about my bad english. I try to explain it more.
I understand voting. I actually don't want to deny giving 1. I just want the 1er(The guy/lady who gives a 1), describe his/her reason, or can't give such a bad vote. I gave an example about Windows 2003 to make myself more clear. It's a box next to "1" that any one selecting 1 must fill it, otherwise rating will not be done.(I can't find a better word to put here instead of "be done", but I know about voting there was one)
So you can give a "1" just if you say why. That's it.
Is it equal to remove 1? If so, I must be crazy giving such an idea because 1 becomes 2! we have just replaced a symbol("1") with another ("2").
Did I describe it good enough?
//This is not a signature
while (I'm_alive) {
printf("I Love Programming");
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Dunn wrote: You'd end up with lots of comments like this: adfjd;fjadl;fdjas
By strange coincidence, that's also the top reason my Win2k3 install has been shut down...
|
|
|
|
|
You wrote:
Requiring voters to comment will not fix anything. You'd end up with lots of comments like this: adfjd;fjadl;fdjas
I answered this already:
at least this way, we understand that the 1 has a true reason or not, if Like a usual message the reason will be published globally.;)
P.S. I read your article about COM, great and I created a picture that need to send you, how can I do that? (I hope you'll read this)
//This is not a signature
while (I'm_alive) {
printf("I Love Programming");
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'll soon do that, thanks.
//This is not a signature
while (I'm_alive) {
printf("I Love Programming");
}
|
|
|
|
|
I sent it. Please take a look at it.
//This is not a signature
while (I'm_alive) {
printf("I Love Programming");
}
|
|
|
|
|
Look at rating of my original message, no need to that, just look at it's color, Didn't I said that we should do something for 1's. Now in this color no one else will even try to read that (to give me more 1's).
//This is not a signature
while (I'm_alive) {
printf("I Love Programming");
}
-- modified at 0:26 Wednesday 14th June, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Osmosian Order wrote: I really need to know how to do X, but X is a rare and obscure thing. If someone posts the answer I need, most people will find it useless (or indecipherable) and will vote it down
What absolute rubbish - this just does NOT happen EVER. Nobody votes a technical post down just because it has no meaning to them - they just move onto a subject that is more of interest to them.
What DOES get voted down, with good reason, is people like YOU who post nothing but advertisments, or off-topic posts about how rubbish {XYZ} by microsoft is.
Current blacklist
svmilky - Extremely rude | FeRtoll - Rude personal emails | ironstrike1 - Rude & Obnoxious behaviour
|
|
|
|
|
|
Speaking of not useful, you've done it again. The more you post, the more useless I see your opinions are. Keep it up and my profile filter will just about be done with you.
Chris Meech
I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar]
When no one was looking, every single American woman between the ages of 18 and 32 went out and got a tatoo just above their rumpus. [link[^]]
|
|
|
|
|
The Osmosian Order wrote: Score: 1.0 (7 votes).
What we have here is a failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach...
|
|
|
|
|
I think any criticism without a base or a reason will be converted to something destructive.
Consider 2 children talking about 2 pictures of 2 cars. One might say "The left one is better" while the other believes "No, the right one...."
I believe "when there is no base, or reason the result of a voting is not reliable."
But we want a quick way to measure qualities as well, we must think about a better way.
What I suggested was an idea that people mostly did not like. I hope some one with a better idea comments.
I personally like the fact that here most of those who gave me 1, were reasonable logical peoples who described the reason of their disagreement. I just wanted that such a thing happens wherever there is a bad rating.
Ragards
Hamed, a guy who wants to be a real programmer!
-- modified at 11:28 Wednesday 14th June, 2006
|
|
|
|