|
Final kick applied to the last surviving spammer.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
|
gone
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gone
Thanks
Do not forget to comment and rate the article if it helped you by any means.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gone.
Thanks
Do not forget to comment and rate the article if it helped you by any means.
|
|
|
|
|
This is the bad example: the inquirer (http://www.codeproject.com/script/Membership/View.aspx?mid=5647060[^]), asking for motivation for down-vote on the question, characterized "people" using @$$-mangled obscene expression in a comment here: How to enable time metrics per line in VS 2015[^].
I would probably gladly provide some more detailed explanations on what's wrong with the question, only if this person simply asked for that. But I think people behaving this way don't worth arguing with.
So, any ideas? Perhaps just a warning? Or reporting on the user account? But I think, it should not be tolerated. And this person is not treated worse than others. Probably, this is not the first time, because there are 3 abuse reports on the account already.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Sergey,
your 'smart' replies would have ticked off many people to the point of swearing. At least he bleeped himself.
As to the down vote he complained about. I know it wasn't you, but why? It's a question, poorly worded granted, but a valid question.
|
|
|
|
|
It was me; I down-voted the question; and I think it is invalid as formulated. But I can re-vote, because later this person answered some of my questions. And, by the way, no one is obliged to claim or explain the votes. However, in this case, I provided some comments in first place.
Now, about "your 'smart' replies" (thank you, even with quotation marks  ) and "point of swearing": this is something very uncertain. You want to criticize my replies? Do me a favor. This would be nice civilized arguments, especially if you explain what's wrong with them. Probably everyone knows that if I see correct convincing arguments, I will gladly correct myself, or will try to stand for my point of view otherwise. I think getting "to the point of swearing" could only be a result of wrong attitude.
It all has nothing to do with obscene expressions and jumping to personal characteristics. Votes and criticism of ideas, posts, solutions, views are discussable, but personal accusations should not be. If you think there are excuses, I'll hardly agree with you.
Thank you for your opinion.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, because of your flagging the question as abusive after your 1 vote, I could not see your 1 vote which I can not argue with. The question is poorly written, as I explain in my response to the question.
However, it is obvious you were replying to something that you did not understand or have knowledge to aid resolving the question. Anyone who has been using VS2015 for a bit would have immediately realized what the question was about. Your 'answers' provided no clarification, or additional information, just made the whole thing more involved and confusing than necessary.
This is proven by your statement "No, I did not know that, as I want to wait for the final release".
The purpose of the QA system is to help people with their problems, and shouldn't be used just to gain points to be on the top of the daily QA point leaderboard.
I have many times stopped myself from marking your responses a Abusive, only because as a CodeProject Admin, my vote would have closed your account immediately.
Please consider the question from the point of view of the questioner, not the answerer. Yes, some (ok many) questions are poorly worded and show a lack of understanding, but that is why they are being asked. If they could articulate the question better, they would probably answer their own question in the process.
The rampant down voting and flagging by some members of questions discourages new users from becoming involved with the CodeProject community, which is not in the spirit of the goals of this site.
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew Dennis wrote: The rampant down voting and flagging by some members of questions discourages new users from becoming involved with the CodeProject community, which is not in the spirit of the goals of this site.
I could not agree more!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
I understood your points, thank you. By the way, yes, the problem was my understanding, because I really though the question is based on inquirer's misconception. After I got some explanations, I re-voted. (And only by that reason, not in response to your criticism, which I respect anyway.) The really abusive was just the unacceptable wording addressed to people, no matter by what reason.
Thank you for the explanation of your points.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Please allow me to give my opinion.
Disclaimer: I am going to use an explicit example, but I think it makes it easier to visualize my point.
Imagine an enquirer inside a puddle of liquid guano. Some of your comments asking for more information could be undesrtood like sitting next to him in dry floor and asking: Did you know it was so fetid when you jumped in?
At the end they don't care much about knowing if it is bat's, cow's or pig's defecations. He just need a rope or something to get out of it.
You know I respect you and I don't want you to think this as a personal attack, because it is not.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you, Nelek.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
"the inquirer ... asking for motivation for down-vote on the question"
They can go find themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry Mr. Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov
I respect your knowledge very much and I've learned a lot from you and never want to miss this!
But this here is simply something like "playing God"!
Yours sincerely.
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I do think that "playing God" is just your misconception, but I'm truly thankful for your nice words and your criticism alike.
—SASergey A Kryukov
modified 21-Jul-15 16:08pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Think about this. Here is a guy who is a steady contributer to the site who asks a question which some people understand implicitly and others do not. He gets into quite long discussions about this misunderstanding which he handles with civility. He gets downvoted anonymously and has a spit without really offending anyone. Then much more discussion which is also conducted in a civil manner. Now we are talking about whether to kick him off the site? wtf?
Peter Wasser
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell
|
|
|
|
|
No, I posed it as a question. We already discussed everything with this person. This is not about kicking a person off, but about not tolerating certain things. This is what I think.
Your opinion is important to me.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks SA. My view is that in any public arena language and tone should be civil. Euphemisms have to be generally acceptable - that is why they exist in language. This is not a science and subjectivity plays a part which is why we have in our law the concept of a "reasonable person". There is always the option to remind someone of the standards or to tell them that something they have said is offensive. Just incidentally in our law the concept of provocation also carries weight. I know these laws are not universal but they are the principles that guide me.
Peter Wasser
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gone.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
|
gone
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.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
