|
Chris Maunder wrote: except for that button which I meant to fix half a dozen times today and only just realised that no, I didn't fix it.
Don't worry I have that all the time 
(by the way the buttons on the reply message page seem a bit off as well but can't be sure about that  )
|
|
|
|
|
For anyone interested, we've added user submissions to both the Bug List[^] and Suggestions and TODOs[^]. And, we'll be maintaining this list moving forward. Hope that helps!
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are no sister sites.
When I clicked that link, all I saw was some mid-east fonted jibberish (and it looked nothing like CP).
.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
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: When I clicked that link, all I saw was some mid-east fonted jibberish (and it looked nothing like CP).
It doesn't look like CP, but it does mirror the content of the forum. Scroll down, and you'll find a familiar signature.
I are Troll 
|
|
|
|
|
A post on the Lounge yesterday (GMT +7) [^], titled "Kinds of Red (a very short story)," by Ravel H. Joyce, is, I think, an interesting "edge case" in terms of the norms of behavior on a public forum.
My first reaction was that the "story" was a jape.
The first thing I did after reading the "story," was to Google on a fairly distinctive phrase in the story to see if it might be posted elsewhere on the web. The only "hit" was to the OP.
Next, I looked at Joyce's profile on CP, read a few previous messages : they all looked "straight" to me. Seeing Joyce had posted a lot to the SoapBox 1.0 didn't raise any flags for me, perhaps because I never went there, and never read SoapBox content (just not my cup of tea).
But soon after I decided the OP might be a real cry of anguish, and posted my response, posts by Damien S and Christian Gauss stated that the author was a teenager, and implied the story was a "fiction."
In this case the title including the words "short story" does, I think, put a little wiggle-room in making the case that enough of a hint was given that it might be fiction.
As a creative writer myself, I admire this post as "fiction," by the way. The writer has some real talent. While it's my personal opinion that using the God-given gift of creativity to manipulate people's emotions in this manner is a "mistake," and probably reflects some real psychological problems in the writer (or, at least, "immaturity"), I can't question the OP's "right" to do that.
And, I don't mind being made a fool of, making a mistake in evaluation in the cause of compassion : I'd rather make that mistake than make the mistake of cynicism where it later turns out what I did not believe happened to be "true" !
If I were moderating a bulletin board with an "open discussion" area like the Lounge, I don't know if I'd allow this kind of "emotional chain-pulling" jape or not : it comes pretty close to the "threshold" of an area which I think would be "intolerable" : like reporting on someone's death or injury as a joke in an "unambiguous" way.
I'm not "reporting" this message or its author; I'm not saying this post and its responses are a "site bug" ! ... but, I'm just interested to hear how other people on CP view this type of post.
The "paradoxical" effect of this post, was the very touching response by Pete O'Hanlon, and the sharing that followed that : I certainly find "value" in that.
thanks, Bill
"Many : not conversant with mathematical studies, imagine that because it [the Analytical Engine] is to give results in numerical notation, its processes must consequently be arithmetical, numerical, rather than algebraical and analytical. This is an error. The engine can arrange and combine numerical quantities as if they were letters or any other general symbols; and it fact it might bring out its results in algebraical notation, were provisions made accordingly." Ada, Countess Lovelace, 1844
|
|
|
|
|
Bill
You raise an interesting thread here. Knowing Ravel's history, I was able to surmise that this was a work of fiction - albeit a remarkable one for someone so young. While it did provoke a deep response in me, and I revealed something about myself that I (for obvious) tend not to talk about, I did not think that the post was unwarranted. Yes, it pulled at emotional strings, but it did provoke positive reactions - I like to think that it showed some of the denizens of the lounge in a good light; your response being a case in point. Did it bring back unpleasant emotions for me? Yes. Did the story enrich the lounge from a remarkable young talent? Definitely.
We must accept that our emotions and personal experiences define who we are, and that sometimes a comment will touch on a painful issue. It is important that we learn to deal with these issues, and that they don't define us - rather, we define them. I say, let posts like these stay - they don't break the KSS rule and, possibly, they may help to bring people who have experienced similar tragedies together.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx
|
|
|
|
|
Posts and discussions such as this allow us to get to know each other, understand each other, and find a common thread to hold us together far better than any peice of code, any gadget, or any bug ever could. We're more than just a bunch of developers looking for programming resources. We're a bunch of guys and girls who get together in the only way many of us can, to find community and commonality.
When we can no longer open up and share our thoughts and feelings - true, imagined or made up - then I'm packing up and calling it quits.
I think the post was gold.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Chris,
Somehow your comments brought to mind a certain discussion in Umberto Eco's "In the Name of the Rose" (one of my favorite novels) : perhaps you would enjoy reading it
"And so the word of God is illustrated by the ass playing a lyre, the owl plowing with a shield, oxen yoking themselves to the plow, rivers flowing upstream, the sea catching fire, the wolf turning hermit! Go hunting for hares with oxen, have owls teach you grammar, have dogs bite fleas, the one-eyed guard the dumb, and the dumb ask for bread, the ant give birth to a calf, roast chickens fly, cakes grow on rooftops, parrots hold rhetoric lessons, hens fertilize cocks, make the cart go before the oxen, the dog sleep in a bed, and all walk with their heads on the ground! What is the aim of this nonsense? A world that is the reverse and the opposite of that established by God, under the pretext of teaching divine precepts!"
"But as the Areopagite teaches," William said humbly, "God can be named only through the most distorted things. And Hugh of St. Victor reminded us that the more the simile becomes dissimilar, the more the truth is revealed to us under the guise of horrible and indecorous figures, the less the imagination is sated in carnal enjoyment, and is thus obliged to perceive the mysteries hidden under the turpitude of the images...."
...A heavy silence fell. Venantius of Salvamec dared break it.
"Venerable Jorge," he said, "Your virtue makes you unjust.... Brother William mentioned just now the Areopagite, who spoke of learning through distortion. And Adelmo that day quoted another lofty authority, the doctor of Aquino, when he said that divine things should be expounded more properly in figures of vile bodies than of noble bodies. First because the human spirit is more easily freed from error; it is obvious, in fact, that certain properties cannot be attributed to divine things, and become uncertain if portrayed by noble corporeal things. In the second place because this humbler depiction is more suited to the knowledge that we have of God on this earth: He shows Himself here more in that which is not than in that which is, and therefore our similitudes of those things furthest from God lead us to a more exact notion of Him, for thus we know that He is above what we say and think."
"Many : not conversant with mathematical studies, imagine that because it [the Analytical Engine] is to give results in numerical notation, its processes must consequently be arithmetical, numerical, rather than algebraical and analytical. This is an error. The engine can arrange and combine numerical quantities as if they were letters or any other general symbols; and it fact it might bring out its results in algebraical notation, were provisions made accordingly." Ada, Countess Lovelace, 1844
|
|
|
|
|
There are more things in heaven and earth, Mr Woodruff,
than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
(apologies to W Shakespear).
------------------------------------
No Good Deed Goes Unpunished Clare Boothe Luce
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: There are more things in heaven and earth, Mr Woodruff,
than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Is there something you are feeling angry about, Dave ?
best, Bill
"Many : not conversant with mathematical studies, imagine that because it [the Analytical Engine] is to give results in numerical notation, its processes must consequently be arithmetical, numerical, rather than algebraical and analytical. This is an error. The engine can arrange and combine numerical quantities as if they were letters or any other general symbols; and it fact it might bring out its results in algebraical notation, were provisions made accordingly." Ada, Countess Lovelace, 1844
|
|
|
|
|
Hello, From a about 2 months ago I noticed I suddenly stopped receiving newsletters from code-project. I did nothing to stop it. I tried changing the settings to start receiving but still nothing. Help me sort this out please?
|
|
|
|
|
I've just sent a reconfirmation request to your inbox. When you get it, click the link to let our system know you're email is still alive.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Today I wandered into the "Quick Answers" area for the first time : not realizing that you had an ability to post a comment to the question(er) ... because I didn't scroll the page down far enough ... I wrote some "please clarify" responses as answers.
Then, when I did realize you could post a comment, I went back and deleted the answers I had made, and moved the text into a comment.
Now, viewing the QA area, I can see my "answers" are still there even though a text area saying "deleted" is highlighted in yellow.
Am I correct in assuming these are visible only to me (because I was the author), or are they still visible to other folks ?
thanks, Bill
"Many : not conversant with mathematical studies, imagine that because it [the Analytical Engine] is to give results in numerical notation, its processes must consequently be arithmetical, numerical, rather than algebraical and analytical. This is an error. The engine can arrange and combine numerical quantities as if they were letters or any other general symbols; and it fact it might bring out its results in algebraical notation, were provisions made accordingly." Ada, Countess Lovelace, 1844
|
|
|
|
|
I noticed that this morning as well.
.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
|
|
|
|
|
I can still see your [empty] answer too so I would imagine it's visible to all 
Dave
BTW, in software, hope and pray is not a viable strategy. (Luc Pattyn)
Why are you using VB6? Do you hate yourself? (Christian Graus)
|
|
|
|
|
They are visible to you because you have the ability to delete (and hence undelete) messages. I think what might make more sense is to allow you to completely and totally nuke your own entry once you've deleted it (so a two-step thing, just for safety)
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, Chris, that confirms what I thought was your intention.
Maybe it's best that way : it's like how "real life" doesn't quite let you erase your mistakes, only (maybe, hopefully) atone for them
best, Bill
"Many : not conversant with mathematical studies, imagine that because it [the Analytical Engine] is to give results in numerical notation, its processes must consequently be arithmetical, numerical, rather than algebraical and analytical. This is an error. The engine can arrange and combine numerical quantities as if they were letters or any other general symbols; and it fact it might bring out its results in algebraical notation, were provisions made accordingly." Ada, Countess Lovelace, 1844
|
|
|
|
|
I have just been trying to post an answer under quick answers and everytime I click on "Update Answer" the "Ignore HTML in text (good for code snippets)" check box gets set.
I clear the check box, preview everything then update the answer, tags show, go to edit the answer and the damn "Ignore HTML in text (good for code snippets)" check box is again checked.
|
|
|
|
|
at one time, the user was in control of those checkboxes when creating a new message, but not when re-entering the message editor page for editing the message (they would then default to how they were when the original editor page was exited). And the default state is also available on your settings page, under the forums tag.
Hope that helps.
|
|
|
|
|
unfortunately/strangely it has only happened for one message so far. I wrote the message, previewed it, all looked right, then posted it and  all the tags are showing, so I checked all my settings and they were fine.
It would also appear that I'm not the only person this has happened to.[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I think I had that happen to me too, once, when editing an article in the Article Submission Wizard. But then it is hard to repeat or to proof, so ...
BTW: CP has new technology in beta that probably will render that checkbox totally obsolete. They call it "CodeSniff".
modified on Sunday, January 17, 2010 8:43 PM
|
|
|
|
|
Just file it under;
It's very rare, It happens, It's more of an annoyance than a real "problem".
|
|
|
|
|
My favourite form of bug.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: CP has new technology in beta that probably will render that checkbox totally obsolete
Not quite. The code sniffing code you so generously provided does wonders for pasting code but there remains the issue of what to do with text that contains < characters. If someone types in code, or pastes code inline instead of as a PRE block, then we still need to offer the option of treating the < character as a literal < and not as a tag marker.
What the code sniff technology will remove is the "Encode HTML tags when pasting" checkbox, instead replacing it with 4 options (yes, not the 3 you initially expected  )
Should be live in the afternoon.
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
