|
+1, this is already possible in QA and in articles, but not yet in forums, and I agree that it would be a good idea to have that feature also in the forums.
The quick red ProgramFOX jumps right over the Lazy<Dog>.
|
|
|
|
|
Also +1. I completely agree.
It would be nice in the comments of QA too - especially after the moron who just kept re-posting ALL of his code into comments the other day 
|
|
|
|
|
|
I notice there are now "Collapse" and "Copy Code" on codeblocks in the forums. But clicking on "Collapse" doesn't do anything than change it's text to "Expand".
Doesn't look like that feature is "Completed" to me 
Tested with:
Google Chrome: Version 41.0.2272.64 beta-m (64-bit)
Internet Explorer: Version 11.0.9600.17633
|
|
|
|
|
In the forums, right?
The forums are all initially collapsed so the PRE tags are all display:none, meaning their height is 0, and so the script that adds a collapsable wrapper can't tell whether or not it should add the wrapper.
If I had it so code blocks always collapse to 0-height (as it used to be) then it would all look perfectly fine. However, I made a change so that collapsing will only collapse to 400px high. So - I need to add a small change to have the collapse wrapper added only when messages are expanded.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Edit: Yeah, in the forums. 
Ah, I didn't notice the collapse now only reduces the height to 400px.
Beeing able to collapse them to 0 height was quite nice when reading an article where I didn't care that much about the code block interrupting the written text. And the collapsed blocks with the scrollbar look a bit silly in my opinion 
You could maybe add an option to either collapse the block completely, only reduce the height or to show the whole block?
By the way, in articles the collapse wrapper is already only added if there is some kind of minimum height already? Are those handled differently?
|
|
|
|
|
Nicholas Marty wrote: By the way, in articles the collapse wrapper is already only added if there is some kind of minimum height already?
Correct.
They are handled differently in that the script can see the height of all the codeblocks at render time.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, ok. I had noticed this in the articles and thought it was a bug - that is actually why I checked this thread out. I prefer collapse working as it used to, collapsing to zero height.
Just my 2 cents.
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
In my sweeps on the forums to find spam and spammers I realized that much of the slipped-by spam is stored inside the personal forums of the members. This is an ongoing practice as I have just found spam messages posted this way on the 4th 11th of February, so it is not possibile to ascribe this kind of spam as a single past wave.
I think that the access to personal forums should be allowed only to high ranking members (silver/gold or higher) or at least to stable non-spamming members for a threshold time (weeks? months?).
My two cents.
EDIT: more recent spam found
Geek code v 3.12
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
I'd have to disagree: if it's a group with a personal forum (and why else would there be one?) then they may have good reasons for keeping it private: if what they as a group are working on is not ready for publication, say.
It's pretty easy to get Silver, and not difficult to get Gold - so suddenly the "privacy" of the forum is completely gone.
I can see what you are saying, but my personal feeling is that privacy can be important; more so than a limited amount of spam. Just my two cents worth!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Limited? The latest spam message I queued to my well-known list (the one I use for the Big Old) has been posted 6 hrs ago. Since I started loggin all my antispam activities I found 1320 spammers plus the ones I still have to report and the ones I did on the spur of the moment.
There is continuous incoming spam through that channel and it isn't defended at all - spam arrives unseen and remains to be indexed for years. Since the average spammer is a bot or a bot-minded individual and the common behaviour is register->post using a well known channel forcing them to wait would spoil a great number of spam attempts.
Geek code v 3.12
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
Except...it's private.
Which means that only the spammer can see it.
I can't, you can't, Google web crawlers can't.
So nobody can follow the links, google can't index them, no page rankings are involved.
Yes, it takes up space on CP servers, but it doesn't achieve the desired affect!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Understood!
EDIT:
OriginalGriff wrote: I can't, you can't, Google web crawlers can't.
Apparently bing can[^]
Almost all of this spam is deleted because I cleansed much of those keyword's spam on CP, but actually it IS indexed apparently.
Geek code v 3.12
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
modified 18-Feb-15 6:59am.
|
|
|
|
|
Are we talking about private personal forums, or just personal forums?
Most of the spammy personal forums aren't marked as private, so they will get picked up by search engines.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
I'm talking about personal forums, not private personal forums.
Geek code v 3.12
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leslie pointed that too 
Geek code v 3.12
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
I love the work you're doing, but private is private.
Sorry.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Geek code v 3.12
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
Well... once you find them and they are nuked, you can always ask someone of the staff to clean up the lasting messages.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
den2k88 wrote: I think that the access to personal forums should be allowed only to high ranking members
Hang on - I think I initially misunderstood you.
When you say "access" you mean "ability to post on their own forum", right?
In this case it's actually not a bad idea at all, and simple to change.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: When you say "access" you mean "ability to post on their own forum", right?
Yes, I was referring precisely to the possibility to create and post in one's own forum.
Geek code v 3.12
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
I Would like to upload the error message image ,that would help me from Code Project members to guild the mistake in the my code.
|
|
|
|
|
Use copy and paste of the text; images are not allowed, for very good reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
