First time, I tried to publish it exactly on April 1st, but the editing shifted it to 2 April 2014, not even my editing, but in the moderation (I wonder why). So it says:
Title: 2 Apr 2014
First posted: 30 Mar 2014 (but I think it wasn't the actual post, only the first draft),
Updated: Updated: 2 Apr 2014.
Taking this experience in account, I published today's article in advance, on 30 March, in order to make last change today. But now, the behavior is different: edition don't shift the title date, and, even worse, presented timing incorrectly reflects actual edition time:
Title: 30 Mar 2015
First posted: 30 Mar 2015
Updated: 30 Mar 2015 (plain wrong: it was updated today).
Apparently, there are more characteristic time marks in the life cycle
Creation of the article on the site, not published, not open to the public. Probably it does not need to be shown.
First saved draft, if any ("Save" instead of "Publish"). It may be important to see for possible legal/priority issues.
First time publication of the article, open to all readers. Important.
Last modification time. Also important.
We have some inconsistency here, but making it consistent might be not enough. Can we be completely certain about timing. Any suggestions?
Also, some detail such as votes number (probably some other statistical figures, I don' remember exactly) are shown inconsistently between the article page and article list page. Of course, I cannot reproduce it . Obviously, this situation changes with time, but the inconsistency can be seen most of the time now.
You are, too, invited to have some fun with me, and especially participate in the article discussions.
As to the fools… In our folk tradition, there is a saying "The fairy tale is lie, but it has a hint, the lesson for the brave guys".
This happens quite intermittently and arbitrarily. At times, instead of returning the articles for the specified author-id, it just returns the latest articles. Looks like you have a fallback / try-catch / timeout handler that defaults to that. I'd say the fallback should at least return an empty collection and not return a completely incorrect list of articles.
You can 'opt' out of it tho, there is a checkbox below the reply and new message window (under the 'allow private email replies...' checkbox).
Then your editor returns to how you knew it.
The checkbox even gets saved so you only have to do it once.
Some persons are post good comments in question & answer section.we want to upvote those valuable comments like stack overflow.. .why we can avoid such important things.we can implement those valuable section to codeproject .
It's interesting that they allow, and indeed, encourage this: the prime motivation of SO was to foster good questions and direct answers. Conversations and discussions were specifically, and systematically, discouraged and suppressed. They then added discussions, and then voting on discussions, and then chat.
I'd prefer we focus on the answers to questions. Discussions are a fundamental part of getting an answer, but should be peripheral to the reward of providing an actual answer.
When i click the "Your email address needs to be confirmed" link it doesn't send any mail to my gmail id and i was change that gmail account to hotmail.then i got the mail from code project.i am using gmail id for my username.please correct the bug as soon as possible..
While answering the questions in CP forum some users down vote the answers/solutions. I got that few times . But onece my answer was not so bad enough to down vote. I don't know what was the reason behind that but that ans has been down voted. So I am proposing to put an extra column with the reason of down voting, so that guy like me can upgrade their solutions and provide those to others to solve another question.
This has been asked for many times, and has been rejected for many reasons including the fact that people will just create dummy accounts to downvote, revenge voting will occur, etc. Ultimately, what value will someone typing "asdgf" have when they just want to downvote out of spite?
No offense but it may be your language style. It's pretty good for a non-native speaker, but people are biased (often subconsciously) against responses that are obviously "foreign" (relatively speaking). It's not even about grammar. Someone using bad grammar but is obviously a native speaker may see his responses better received than someone writing perfect grammar but in a very unusual (non-native) style.
This is sad, but true. Mind you, I had a lovely email from one of our regulars this morning - he's doing some fantastic things now and he just mailed me to thank me for taking time to help him. It's moments like that, that make it all worthwhile. The knowing that you managed to help someone get on and do the things they want to do.
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.
It's seems the 'line breaks' aren't displayed. Unless you enter two of them and then both of them are displayed.
2 line breaks before this line./
1 line break before this line
In Edit they do come back, in the preview they aren't displayed.
So probably just something with the display
In case it's important:
Chrome Version 41.0.2272.101 m
Never mind, apparently it's all due to the 'markdown formatting', I completely missed that.
And there is a checkbox to 'un-use' it so that solves the problems (the checkbox even saves so very handy )