|
Actually, it shows only '(1 vote)' if a message is reported in forums where downvoting isn't possible. If downvoting is possible, then it shows the number of reports.
The quick red ProgramFOX jumps right over the Lazy<Dog>.
|
|
|
|
|
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote: The post was removed with just 1 vote, and I wonder if that's even possible.
It is if it's a top member. With the spammers in place we lessened the requirements to quickly get rid of poor messages. A platinum level member has decided your post was offensive and it's been removed.
I disagree with this and have reinstated the message.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: It is if it's a top member.
Interesting, but I it appears that some people are misusing their powers.
Chris Maunder wrote: I disagree with this and have reinstated the message.
OK, thanks. But I'm unable to see the message. It still shows as removed.
"Real men drive manual transmission" - Rajesh.
|
|
|
|
|
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote: Interesting, but I it appears that some people are misusing their powers.
Whoever voted you down probably had no clue he had the power to remove a message with 1 single vote.
|
|
|
|
|
Just a thought: Messages could be reported spam/abusive and removed in a jiffy only if it's a new member's post. For instance, one "top" member's vote shouldn't be sufficient to remove another top member's post as abusive.
If the post being reported is made by a good old member, then several votes must be required before it can be removed (with no respect to "who" is reporting it).
Also, I'm not sure if it's just me, I can't see the reinstated message.
"Real men drive manual transmission" - Rajesh.
|
|
|
|
|
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote:
Also, I'm not sure if it's just me, I can't see the reinstated message.
Not just you. Shows as deleted to me as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote: Messages could be reported spam/abusive and removed in a jiffy only if it's a new member's post
Unfortunately we have old accounts that get used for spam. It's happened time after time.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
How much of the spam is from necroaccounts vs just registered ones? (And how many of the necrospamming accounts were used a non-trivial amount?) I think all the times I was trying to nuke something from orbit it was from new accounts.
If most of the spam's from new or almost never used accounts I think the colateral damage from 1 shot to kill is probably too high if it's catching regular users when they annoy some high rep idiot.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
I've adjusted things so 1 shot kills are far less likely.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with Dan. I urge that you rethink if it should be possible for a regular's post to be removed with just one vote.
Spammers are anyways being handled well, and in case someone uses an existing account to spam, the existing account won't have much of reputation points (in which case, it isn't considered an important account).
There should be some way to distinguish a contributing regular from a spammer who is using an account registered years ago. I presume the reputation points can help with this and so, it can be put to good use.
"Real men drive manual transmission" - Rajesh.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote:
I disagree with this and have reinstated the message.
At the moment, the message still shows as deleted/removed.
|
|
|
|
|
Should be good now.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I've added my 5 to this.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you, good sir. 
"Real men drive manual transmission" - Rajesh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Two Sign in event on same day
Click here[^] for screenshot
|
|
|
|
|
"Days" are relative to Toronto time. If I'm correct, those sign in events happened either side of Midnight our time.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: If I'm correct, those sign in events happened either side of Midnight our time.
Yes, because (according to his profile), Shanalal is from India, and when the time 0:00 AM is in Toronto, then the time is 9:30 AM in India.
The quick red ProgramFOX jumps right over the Lazy<Dog>.
|
|
|
|
|
Sir,
Chris Maunder wrote: "Days" are relative to Toronto time. If I'm correct, those sign in events happened either side of Midnight our time.
My last login is 08-April-2013 around 10 pm - 11 pm in UTC+05:30. Next login is 10-April-13 around 10 am - 11 am in UTC+05:30.
In 08-April-2013, my net was very slow, i login to codeproject but the site was not loaded completely. in same time i was hibernate my lap.
In 10-April-13, i was refresh that tab. After that i see this bug.
|
|
|
|
|
According to the image you sent, the login times were 9:28AM and 10:30AM which would be just before and just after midnight CPST (Code Project Standard Time).
|
|
|
|
|
Last week I complained that my article didn't appear in the newsletter.
Well, it didn't show up this week either. What's wrong?
|
|
|
|
|
My apologies for not replying earlier - we've been insanely busy[^] and emails are piling up.
I did, however, check your article and could find no good reason for it not to appear. I spent a bit of time on the issue and came up blank. As to this week, only articles that were posted in the last 7 days wil appear in a given weekly newsletter.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I noticed that it got 800 views in the first 11 hours after I posted it (I posted it after 9PM, IIRC), and only 200-300 views in the two weeks after that. So it seemed to me like it was revoked from whatever place where people were seeing it (but I don't know how people found it in the first place, I myself just use the newsletter.)
Hey I know, maybe I should edit it. Then it might appear as updated, at least. I see an error in it anyhow.
|
|
|
|
|
I think articles require a minimum of 3 votes to be include. I'll check.
|
|
|
|
|
Wait, what? How are people going to vote on the article if they don't see it in the first place? Should I be doing something extra to gather votes, like, advertising the article somewhere else on the site?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
