|
Neither. "It worked in testing". I'm looking into it now to see what's happening, but that's certainly not the intent.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
When typing Answer, the preview don't like if there is more than 1 piece of code and get corrupted. When answer is validated, display is OK.
When improving the answer, preview is corrupted differently.
Using <span class="highlight"></span> in a piece of code can get really complicated and almost impossible to improve (edit).
Patrice
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Can you please try now?
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Looks way better 
Thanks
Patrice
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Secondary effect: some <p> tags are inserted around every paragraph.
Patrice
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
The current method of dealing with Spam messages and their authors is somewhat labour intensive. The discoverer has to create a new message in the forum with a link to the spam message, and the spammer's account. It also has the drawback that spam messages disappear quicker than the spammers. This means we mostly have to take it on trust that our fellow spam hunters have correctly identified the perp.
This is probably too much to ask but ... how about something along the lines of:
- When a message is flagged as spam, it is immediately moved to the Spam and Abuse forum.
- Any message in this forum can be flagged as not-spam, and returned whence it came.
- Every additional spam flag following the initial one gets added to a (weighted) count.
- When the message count reaches a sufficient level, both message and spammer are removed.
I'm not sure how QA messages could fit into such a system, but the forums seem to be the main target of spammers these days.
|
|
|
|
|
I like your thinking. How about something cleaner:
Whenever someone marks a message as spam it goes into the same spam moderation queue that all automatically marked spam goes into. That way we have a single system, and a single point of reference for spam.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
That's fine as far as it goes, but it still means we have to add a message somewhere to identify the account that posted it. Getting rid of the messages is easy, getting rid of the spammers is somewhat less so. But I'm sure you experts will come up with something brilliant.
|
|
|
|
|
We already have the ability to auto-nuke member accounts when message reports hit a certain threshold. Unfortunately there were too many accounts getting nuked because of trigger fingers so we've backed away from allowing auto-nuking.
It makes it more work for sure, but it protects members from unintended consequences.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
What would be useful is for auto notification when marking spam in moderation. So, you say that something is spam, then a message is automatically created in the spam forum, including links to the messages/answers/comments for the account being moderated. This is the manual part that we end up doing anyway, so cutting this out would be a huge time saver, and doesn't have the effect that auto-nuke has - members are still required to vote. I would be tempted to make this option a separate one from just marking something as spam - make it explicit that the moderator wants to take this action.
|
|
|
|
|
I like the idea. If possible, this seems quite clean and still saves time and keystrockes 
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, I remember this account. He posted a very spammy answer of SQL command to an answer which had nothing to do with SQL itself. As soon as I report as "Not an answer" the answer was gone.
Checking into my flags for "Not an answer" may help in finding that answer, maybe. By thinking hard, I (just think), think the answer was posted on: How Memory map is done in a processor[^].
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
|
If I misclicked vote up/down button, then there is no way to cancel it. There should be a way of cancelling.
TVMU^P[[IGIOQHG^JSH A#@RFJ\c^JPL>;"[, /|+&WLEZGc
AFXc!L<br />
%^]*IRXD#@GKCQ R\^SF_WcHbORY87֦ʻ6ϣN8ȤBcRAV\Z^&SU~%CSWQ@#2
W_ADEPABIKRDFVS)EVLQK)JKQUFK[MUKs$GwU#QDXBER@CBN%
R0~53%eYrd8mt^7Z6]iTF+(EWfJ9zaK-iTV.C\y<pjxsg-b$f4ia> -----------------------------------------------
128 bit encrypted signature, crack if you can
|
|
|
|
|
No, there should be a way to hold your thoughts and do not black out too soon.
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
If you downvoted by mistake, you only option is to change your vote to "upvote" if you think downvote was not earn.
Patrice
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
what if up vote is not earned as well.
TVMU^P[[IGIOQHG^JSH A#@RFJ\c^JPL>;"[, /|+&WLEZGc
AFXc!L<br />
%^]*IRXD#@GKCQ R\^SF_WcHbORY87֦ʻ6ϣN8ȤBcRAV\Z^&SU~%CSWQ@#2
W_ADEPABIKRDFVS)EVLQK)JKQUFK[MUKs$GwU#QDXBER@CBN%
R0~53%eYrd8mt^7Z6]iTF+(EWfJ9zaK-iTV.C\y<pjxsg-b$f4ia> -----------------------------------------------
128 bit encrypted signature, crack if you can
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrice
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
I provided answers to a couple of questions earlier today and gained +10 reputation for doing so, yet when my answer is downvoted I lose 16, is that normal?
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is the current stalemate over use of comment box versus answer box. To do the math on the gambit (one point for a comment or possibly minus six for a bad answer) and come up with a formal method to win at all rolls of that die precludes me from venturing into QA.
Other than to downvote Answers.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, that is totally normal because if you post a helpful post, same user (with a weight of 8) would provide you with +40.
That is the voting system on CodeProject. The reputation system on CodeProject[^] has a lot of features, which are used to ensure that good content comes on top and bad content goes down. The weight is gained by users for being helpful to the community. +10 is just to add the answer post, for taking the pain to answer the user. -16 if you did not answer it well or helpful. That also depends on the user down-voting. Please look into the weights on that page.
I would suggest that you do not post answers to questions you have no idea about. Ignoring a question is best to avoid downvotes. A downvote of -16 is usually because your answer wasn't helpful.
I hope you understand.
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, that makes perfect sense. I hadn't contemplated that it could be down to reputation of the voter, and missed that in the information about reputation.
Thanks all for clarifying.
|
|
|
|
|
Asking a question will also land you a point deficit.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
