|
digital man wrote: you) appear to be saying that it is these arbiters of good taste that decide what can be seen and unless I just happen to pop by prior to it receiving the requisite votes to remove it the post is censored, essentially, and my right to decide whether or not to read it has been removed.
I wonder how you made this up. I don't know about LunaticFringe, but my point was entirely different. I was stating how the current system works against your will to read such removed posts.
I do think that there could be some sort of a provision for the people who want to read such a 'purportedly abusive' post at their own will.
You could request Chris to look into the possibilities of implementing such a feature.
PS: I'm sick of seeing 1 votes and balancing those. I not balancing anything any more.
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote: You could request Chris to look into the possibilities of implementing such a feature.
Pretty sure that's what my threads were proposing.
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote: PS: I'm sick of seeing 1 votes and balancing those. I not balancing anything any more.
Agreed: would be nice if all voting were to be removed as it is superfluous: it doesn't not make me want to read a post.Tychotics: take us back to the moon
"Life, for ever dying to be born afresh, for ever young and eager, will presently stand upon this earth as upon a footstool, and stretch out its realm amidst the stars."
H. G. Wells
|
|
|
|
|
digital man wrote: would be nice if all voting were to be removed a
If he couldn't vote down everyone, what would Lunatic do while the rest of us were working?Jon
"I don't think the human race will survive the next thousand years, unless we spread into space. There are too many accidents that can befall life on a single planet. But I'm an optimist. We will reach out to the stars." ~ Stephen Hawking,
Soap Box 1.0: the first, the original, reborn troll-less
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why does it not work like in articles? Just got anonymous vote of 1 to my first Tip/Trick and now I’m wondering if it has sense to do some effort to write something to section Tip/Trick…..
|
|
|
|
|
They're still working on the Tips/Tricks stuff. I think they even mentioned that non-anonymouse 1/2 voting will be implemented "soon"..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 suspect the low votes may be due to the fact that your Tip contains no detail about what the code does or why. People tend to like good descriptions, as can be found in your well received articles. txtspeak is the realm of 9 year old children, not developers. Christian Graus
|
|
|
|
|
I think he was actually just wondering why the Tips/Tricks can be anonymously 1-voted, while articles cannot be..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
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Richard,
Thanks for good explanation. I see your point. This is the reason why there is written:
“It's useful for someone who already knows it and who is just looking for the exact solution.”
My personal opinion is that if I want a detailed description, I have to go to the section articles. But, yes  … I respect the voting . I just say, it could be good to know the reason of vote 1/2 like “article voting system” does.
Thanks, Petr.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Petr,
I agree with your explanation, but unfortunately, as we see every day, people just do not read things like this. I do agree that anonymous 1/2 voting should not be allowed; let's hope this is another change that happens soon.txtspeak is the realm of 9 year old children, not developers. Christian Graus
|
|
|
|
|
Just had a look at your tip/trick, and for the amount of information you have posted, would have thought that should have been fleshed out with some narrative, and then be used as a full blown article.
I understand a tip/trick to be a brief piece of information or code relating to a single feature/topic/point. That is presented in a concise way.
[and no i haven't voted...so it wasn't me!]
|
|
|
|
|
Hi daveauld,
Understand. I will try to improve it . Thanks for feedback.
Petr
|
|
|
|
|
This has now been changed so that you have to comment now.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
|
We don't allow image links in forums. It looks like that member tried to post the image link directly instead of using the emoticon shortcuts.
I've fixed itcheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
When I added this message[^] to JSOP's article "FileSystemWatcher - Pure Chaos (Part 2 of 2)", my latest messages page[^] claimed I added it to "Article "FileSystemWatcher - Pure Chaos (Part 1 of 2)" (Article)"
[ADDED]
Chris, I have a "print to PDF" file to prove this. Let me know if you want it.
[/ADDED]Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
I only read code that is properly formatted, adding PRE tags is the easiest way to obtain that. All Toronto weekends should be extremely wet until we get it automated in regular forums, not just QA.
modified on Sunday, February 14, 2010 4:27 PM
|
|
|
|
|
I came here to report that.
I think the problem is that I accidentally had Part 1 of 2 in the article title, and even though I changed it, the forum title didn't change to reflect it.
Weirdness..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
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: Pure Chaos
Yup - Pure Chaos.
Me, I'm dishonest. And a dishonest man you can always trust to be dishonest.
Honestly. It's the honest ones you want to watch out for...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oi. Who is creating chaos now? I did NOT write "Pure Chaos", JSOP did.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
I only read code that is properly formatted, adding PRE tags is the easiest way to obtain that. All Toronto weekends should be extremely wet until we get it automated in regular forums, not just QA.
|
|
|
|
|
| This is a known issue that we've not ha a chance to fix. It's definitely on our TODO though. cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Lately, I've been noticing that when you paste a link into the editor, it takes anywhere from 1 to 7 seconds to paste the whole thing. The url that you're trying to paste shows up almost immediately, but the "decoration" added by CP takes several seconds to be added to the pasted URL..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
|
|
|
|
|
Is it consistent, or jsut at certain times.
When pasting there are a few things that happen:
1. We see if it's a URL
1.1 if it's a URL for an article then we try and find the title of the article
so we can have the text of the link be the title, not the URL
1.2 if it's a non-article link we paste and inlinkerate
2. [In Quick Answers] If it's not a URL we see if it's potentially a code block. If it is we wrap it in PRE tags.
These checks are all done using ajax, so that's the lag your seeing. Would it help for us to time how long it's taking for you and disable this if it goes over, say 5 secs?cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, the longest lag is when I'm pasting a link to an article. That explains it..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 noticed today that the number of pages views for a given article are not the same as the number reported in your "My Articles" list. For instance, I posted an article today, and in the list it showed 107 Page Views, but when I actually viewed the article, it show 60 views.
EDIT ===========
It seems to be fairly close now. I guess it's just a matter of how you reload the page. Weirdness. You can safely ignore this if you want..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
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
