I slipped-up and forgot to make a backup of my "solution" before the "jaws of death" closed: [^].
Is that "version" hack still available that someone here (Rage ?) showed me how to use to recover the post ?
Edit: yes, it was ProgramFox showed me how to find a deleted response using the 'version url, and I found it, sans carriage-returns, but otherwise intact.
Unfortunately, I lost my comment to Sergey's comment which was meant to go in my ammunition box
«OOP to me means only messaging, local retention and protection and hiding of state-process, and extreme late-binding of all things. » Alan Kay's clarification on what he meant by the term "Object" in "Object-Oriented Programming."
Allow the author to set the Author level at which a member must be in order to vote on his article. This is based on the assumption that most higher level users are actually programmers and have a certain level of maturity and integrity.
The default would be ALL, but other levels would be Platinum, Gold, Silver, and Bronze.
Also, allow the author to contest a vote that is not tied to reporting a message as abuse or spam. Another option in the report icon menu could be "Unjustified".
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010 ----- You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010 ----- When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
I can understand your concern but that won't help as all will start setting level as platinum and in most of the case i have seen,members going through and making use of the Article are bronze or silver levels.
We have rating system in place especially to handle such cases. These negative voting will not make any effect. As per as the recent case is concerned, member is under process and will be no more within few hours.
If you still find such members who always see everything negatively, mention them at SA watch and necessary action will be taken (We had found such members in past).
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad
When approving a forum message from the moderation queue, it will be shown as modified (" [modified]" appended to the subject). This might irritate the poster.
Also the message count on the user's profile will count such messages twice. I just noticed this behaviour with a new member posting his first message. When then openning the Lates Messages list, there will be only one message shown.
I see that you're new to Code Project. First of all, please let me welcome to the community - it's a great place to be, and people will generally try to help out. Saying that, there are a couple of things that you should be aware of.
First of all, this part of the site is intended for people who want to suggest a new feature for the site, or who want to report a bug in the site. This isn't the place to pose a programming question.
Second point - people will help you with issues. They are highly unlikely to just hand over fully working systems for you. If you're lucky, you might find an article that does exactly want and that's great; the articles are what makes this site great after all. If there are no articles, then people will answer specific programming problems, but you have to show that you have tried things, and you should highlight where things are going wrong.
He sure is. After reading arrogant and often technically shallow responses from people, and assuming even momentarily that the site's not what it used to be, you then come across guys like Pete and feel comfortable in that - for every idiot out there, CP has intelligent, smart-thinking folks like Pete!
Hi CP Admins,
I am Mohammed Hameed, the CP account holder for email Id: hameed dot in at hotmail dot com.
Currently using CP from the currently logged in account: hameed dot in at gmail dot com as my previous account is blocked.
Please consider this as my humble request to reactivate my account as currently it is blocked some months ago. I don't know why it has been blocked, may be unknowingly have done something which is not acceptable as per CP rules.
I've looked into the things you posted on the days you were reported. Your account was not closed for an isolated incident, but rather over time. I would say to please avoid posting links to third party sites and products, and avoid accepting your own solution as the answer wherever possible.
and avoid accepting your own solution as the answer
What's the deal with that? What's wrong in accepting your own answer if it's the best of the lot? (You could suppress rep score points if you think that's going to lead to cheating). But to force someone into picking the 2nd best solution merely because it'll get you banned from the site seems like a quirky approach.
If you wanted to make a new separate suggestion to suppress rep points when you accept your own solution, I'm sure it would be something for the team / community to mull over.
My impression is that it isn't a huge problem, though.
In this case, of the questions asked that had solutions, a fairly large percentage were self solutions. Were they all legitimate situations? I want to believe so. But the more self solutions you accept, the more people might wonder. What I was trying to get at was more along the lines of, "if 80% of the solutions on your questions are your own solution, maybe try and lower that percentage a bit."
Ok, thanks Sean. It's possible that the OP was doing that sort of thing as an easy way to pad up his rep score. I was just wondering why CP has a policy against someone marking their answer as the solution. If CP does not, then that's a good thing in my opinion.
No, AFAIK there is no policy about it but, the problem is that many, many times the people doing that answers themselves within minutes. So... if it was so easy, why ask?
90% of that people doing that get a pattern and when they get discovered, they get most of them time nuked.
If the user self answered after a reasonable period of time, then it usually is a legitime solution. I have seen that more times and nothing happens. It is just the result of hard work and willing to help people coming in similar situation, and that is the purpose of the site.
However, there are people less patient or tolerant, or it might be a user that at once self answers several of his own questions. Then the probability of getting reported is higher.
In addition, the reports are still in perpetual mode.
That's how Nagy got nuked. And that's why the suggestion to have a deadline for the reports to vanish after a reasonable lapse of time was made. Spamers / Abusers and other people like get nuked by the CP Guard quite fast.
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.
i follow the lounge , QA section but find it difficult to navigate using the current paging system. can we not have go to page number in all the list? so user can directly go to page no 50 if he wants.
The text box is already there: The URL field of your browser.
It is counting the offset number of posts in the 'fr' field. So you need a little computation by multiplying the page number minus one with the per page value selected on top of the forum (25 by default).
I've needed it twice or so over the years I've been a member, when the search for a post gave me null results. You know those times when you know what the post was about but you've forgotten the exact wording.
It was no request from my side, merely an interpretation of the OP.
Personally I would like the possibility to go to a certain date, but that would be rather far down on my wish list.
Can we please be able to rename tags when only changing the case of some letters?
The quick red ProgramFOX jumps right over the Lazy<Dog>.