|
|
Articles can help, I'm getting 15-20 points a day even if I don't do anything because of people reading those and downloading the source zips. But yeah if you care about reputation then being active in reputation hotspots like here, language forums and Q&A is a good idea.
|
|
|
|
|
All of mine are done as blog post, they don't seem to hold as much weight as the ones posted directly.
I use Live writer to write with. I have trouble with the online article writer.I'm not a web guy.
Even a my Source code download is only worth 1 point, but if I download someone elses I get 2 points.
Oh well I'm not here for the points or the prestige anyway.
I just hope what I write will help others.
|
|
|
|
|
BobJanova wrote: I think it makes more sense to 'retire' accounts that haven't been active at all for (say) 3 years
If that person has posted an article, regardless of how old it is (OK, maybe a decade is a good cutoff) they should still have the right to "their" name.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: they should still have the right to "their" name.
Says the guy who can bypass the spoofing software and recreate himself. 
|
|
|
|
|
I think retiring unused names (and allowing others to 'reserve' them) would be a good idea.
When I signed up I wanted 'StarNamer' as I use it on many other sites (e.g. StackOverflow[^], AskUbuntu[^] and other StackExchange sites). Unfortunately, it was already registered so I had to be satisfied with 'StarNamer_'[^]. As far as I can tell, the original 'starnamer'[^] has never posted anything and simply has the initial 100 points for signing up!
Really frustrating! It wouldn't be so annoying if (s)he was a reasonably active member!
|
|
|
|
|
Somewhere in this thread is a post from Chris where he did replicate his name by creating his name with HTML tags that didn't display and bypassed the spoofing software. He might have fixed that glitch by now, but his second copy still exists.
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like a recipe for impersonation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christopher Duncan wrote: Sounds like a recipe for impersonation.
Another outburst like that and I'll ban you!
just kidding.
not the real Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: not the real Chris Maunder
Cute trick "jeron1"!
|
|
|
|
|
I've never, ever found that problem.
Apparently, nobody shares my combination of first name and last name. Not only in Codeproject, but nowhere.
Just sharing... 
Pablo.
"Accident: An inevitable occurrence due to the action of immutable natural laws." (Ambrose Bierce, circa 1899).
"You are to act in the light of experience as guided by intelligence" (Rex Stout, "In the Best Families", 1950).
|
|
|
|
|
I request you to reconsider allowing someone to create a handle that's already in use. At best it can cause confusion, at worst it's a recipe for impersonation (to quote Christopher Duncan).
Thanks,
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
See? The impersonation has started already!
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, that wasn't me who posted! 
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
It was me.
Had you going for a moment though!
|
|
|
|
|
D'oh! 
|
|
|
|
|
I get it can cause problems, but I'm looking for some creative solutions.
If this is a problem too hard for our collective intelligence, so be it.
But I think it's not.
|
|
|
|
|
If you disallowed it, would someone be able to change their name to (for example) this?
Chris Maunder
IMHO, I think display names should be plain text and unique.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
The rules we use would be the same as we use now: comparison between a new name and an existing name is done by collapsing whitespaces, removing HTML and replacing "similar" characters (eg characters in other alphabets that look like English characters).
So Chris&Maunder would be marked as gray (and probably have an icon next to it showing it's a fakey).
|
|
|
|
|
I'm very much pro that fake icon.
Could we also get a Display Name history in the profile?
Sometimes it's hard to keep track on who's who. Or should I post this in sugs'n'bugs?
Politicians are always realistically manoeuvering for the next election. They are obsolete as fundamental problem-solvers.
Buckminster Fuller
|
|
|
|
|
Just reserve a colour for dupe names, or put a dot in front of them. It doesn't have to be obtrusive, just known.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I'd say that it would be a better idea to allow this feature only if the member has identified himself.
E.g. CP could send a letter containing a code to enter in order to verify a users identity, and only verified users would be able to have a double display name. Of course the verification would cost the user a bit, let's say 30$ should be sufficient to pay the administration cost and the postal service to deliver the letter pretty much anywhere in the world.
Veni, vidi, caecus
|
|
|
|
|
Did you intentionally leave off the joke icon?
|
|
|
|
|
Dis ain't no joke, brah!
Veni, vidi, caecus
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
