|
Oh dear! Where are we going? (My 5  )
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Could this member's name[^] mean anything other than spammer?
Enlarge image on mouseover gridview image field[^]
Why is common sense not common?
Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level where they are an expert.
Sometimes it takes a lot of work to be lazy
Please stand in front of my pistol, smile and wait for the flash - JSOP 2012
|
|
|
|
|
 Not that you can tell he is a cut'n'paste merchant!
"I was searching to know about image zoomin on mouse hober and found your blog this morning."
On a QA question... Oh, dear, oh dear, oh dear...
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: On a QA question
Well if they had any smarts they would be able to find something better to do that spamming...
Why is common sense not common?
Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level where they are an expert.
Sometimes it takes a lot of work to be lazy
Please stand in front of my pistol, smile and wait for the flash - JSOP 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Jobz is hard to come by these days!
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
|
|
|
|
|
I think computer viruses should count as life. I think it says something about human nature that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. We've created life in our own image.
Stephen Hawking
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reported member and the abusive comments.
Cheers,
Peter
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
bhupatpatel[^]
posted very confusing/abusive vote to my tip (HTML5/CSS3 graphic enhancement: buttons, inputs). The Tip itself got 49 votes, allocated as following: 45 members voted 5*, 3 voted 4* and only this one voted 1*, posting rather confusing message:
Reason for my vote of 1 to good
That account has been essentially inactive: this strange vote is the ONLY contribution to the site. My recommendation: deactivate bhupatpatel account permanently.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think that this guy is meaning to be abusive. I think that the issue with this user is that he has made the mistake of thinking 1 is good and 5 is bad and simply voted poorly out of ignorance. Cheers, and a good article, BTW.
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you Marcus, that might be the case. On the other hand, in regards to that account per se: it's entire activity is just that single vote of 1, actually trashing my work. Why should we tolerate such either negligence, or abuse of our online resources? I still recommend to deactivate this account, which, de facto is inactive for very long time, and essentially did more harm than good to the site community. Btw, I can bring here more examples of such strange/suspicious voting practice, heavily distorting the site statistics by trashing good works.
Rgds, Alex
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Thanks for your message. Actually I know that, and was lucky to have enough "fives" for this particular article. But in general "cyber-trolling", or more specific pertinent to the case, abusive voting practice can badly affect new articles; if some folk(s) post unjustified first "1", then the article falls below the visibility threshold filter (typically 3), thus it will be heavily overlooked by many site members. It's unfair to the author of the article, who spend numerous hours, even days working on it. Thus, I stand on my suggestion to remove (deactivate) accounts involved in abusive voting practice toward articles/tips, because such accounts do more harm than good to the site, discouraging potential authors, distorting statistics, and essentially, degrading overall content quality.
Anyway, thanks again for consideration; I appreciate your attention to this case.
Rgds, AB
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes... he changed his name but did not change his attitude.
Why is common sense not common?
Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level where they are an expert.
Sometimes it takes a lot of work to be lazy
Please stand in front of my pistol, smile and wait for the flash - JSOP 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
This member[^] is spamming the forums with rather pointless messages.
One of these days I'm going to think of a really clever signature.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure what to make of a bright enthusiastic major contributor to CP who posts identical content on a personal web-site, and on CP as an article, simultaneously:
On CP:
An introduction to Type Script[^]
On web-site:
http://www.amazedsaint.com/2012/10/microsoft-typescript-and-quick.html[^]
I certainly don't think it's "spam," and I don't think it's "abusive," and, sure, I feel the article benefits CP, but something about it doesn't quite feel right.
Should a CP article, like the one cited above, allow the inclusion of many links to outside CP resources on the author of the article's website, his twitter account, his web-site: I am not sure.
Your thoughts ?
best, Bill
~
Confused by Windows 8 ? This may help: [ ^] !
|
|
|
|
|
As this is the same author, and if he is the real author, without any plagiarism involved, there is nothing wrong about publishing of the same material in different magazines. The only sin would be the lack of the reference to author's own work (which would reveal that the later work in not original, which would be a right thing; actually, the decent author should clearly indicate that this is some kind of compilation work).
Some publishers require only the original work, which can create some problems. As far as I know, CodeProject is the site where non-original works are considered as fine. But of course, the reference to the original work, as well as the clear statement that some work is not original should be there. I would rather write to the author and convince him to modify one of two of these articles to add appropriate statements and references or cross-references. If the author is interested in getting more trust and authority, it would only help him.
So, Bill, could you do it by yourself, as the original reporter of this problem? If you want to reference to this post, it would be fine.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
This one http://www.codeproject.com/script/Articles/ArticleVersion.aspx?waid=19135&aid=404094[^] has appeared on the list of updated-for-aproval, but that's not a article! It's only 4 lines of active "code", and all of them are just variant date time format strings.
Surely, this is at best a tip? Is there really no mechanism for saying "This should not have been approved"?
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
