|
Single responsibility. Spam moderation is purely spam moderation. It's not about whether it passes the community's test for appropriateness (For that we'd need the help of Watson[^] in order to mark and place into a queue those posts needing double checking)
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Although I see your point, I am with @chris-maunder. Let the spam filter learn and do its job without interferences of new "criteria".
CHill60 wrote: The options are currently "This is spam" or "This is perfectly acceptable" (paraphrased)
What about "This is spam" and "This is NOT spam"?
That should do the job. Quality of the question is... another question  An it is already possible to deal with it.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
A less skilled Author send me a disturbing message to my genius comment.I want to reply to the message in more sophisticated and secure way, However I can't see it to the article comment section. Is it deleted or something happened ?
|
|
|
|
|
Sumuj John wrote: my genius comment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The author replied however I can't see it in the comment section. I only got the email and the notification.
|
|
|
|
|
So maybe he deleted his message. You can still reply if you know who it was.
|
|
|
|
|
How? To my own message thread ? It was only me on the thread till for a few min except RyanDev , not the "Author" replied something.
|
|
|
|
|
I am still not quite sure what your problem is, or what the above means.
However, if you wish to send a comment to the author then post a new message on the forum. If someone sends you a private message there is nothing to stop you opening a new thread and quoting what they sent you.
|
|
|
|
|
Not I want to send a new message. He replied my message. I only want to reply his message. That all. As you said he might delete it, since he can't get away from the problem he created.
|
|
|
|
|
Then do as I suggested, it's really not that difficult. If you want to see an example, then click on the "Email" link below, and send me a message, and I will show you how to respond.
|
|
|
|
|
I know what you mean, send the message as "private". I'm well aware that. I commented as public since the article is public and I expect public reply. I want his another weak message reply to be public as well.
|
|
|
|
|
What you want and what you get are two different things. Everyone here is entitled to post public or private messages as the mood takes them, you cannot force people to bow to your wishes.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not trying to make someone to bow to my wishes. I'm not god and never claimed. The security subject is too sensitive. That's all my concern.
|
|
|
|
|
You have made your feelings known about the article, and it is up to the rest of us to agree or disagree with both the article and your comments. Leave it at that, it's really not important.
|
|
|
|
|
So, another poster has added a reply which he or she has then deleted and you want to reply to them because you feel you are cleverer than they are. Why? They have removed their message. It sounds like all you want to do is humiliate someone. That's not a good thing to do.
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not trying to humiliate someone. The author feels that the article he wrote is "novel and interesting". Replying my comment doesn't change his feeling since he still claims the article is "novel and interesting".
|
|
|
|
|
You've expressed your comments, unfortunately not very politely, and at this point you should let go and move on.
Security is subjective. How you judge security often depends on context and expectations, and what you are trying to secure. Guy's put some effort in and has written a decent article. Pete gave it a 4, which I feel is fairly representative of its quality/accuracy/content.
Your opinions on the content were not shared by many others, so it would be nice if you would stop taking this personally and leave that author alone.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Security is subjective. How you judge security often depends on context and expectations, and what you are trying to secure.
I don't want to start another tutor here. I already put my effort in the article comment section. Please go there and recite it.
Quote: Guy's put some effort in and has written a decent article.
I see that he wrote good English article.That's all. No security, it just drag and drop text, clipboard,...
Quote: Your opinions on the content were not shared by many others,
Not sure what you mean. If that of voting, I voted your comment. I know I'm down voted, you can down vote this one too.
Someone mistake can only be correct by speaking the truth. Not voting a nonsense article with 50-60 upvotes.
modified 2-Jun-16 19:30pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I speak solely from my perspective and it's not a whine-post about how hard reputation on this site is. Because it isn't. Your System is very fair and it's clear that it's not in place only since a few days.
I looked at the system as objective-as-possible, questioning some of the categories.
When I started to have a problem in imagination, how to achieve specific reputations, it came down to this for me:
* In my imagination there are three main groups of people lurking around here at CP
* The "readers" - people who like to read articles/community forum/sometimes find answers to questions
* The "askers" - people who chose this site over SO (or parallel to it) to post their question in hope to get the right answer that brings them forward
* The "authors" - people who have (deeper) knowledge in some areas and/or just like to share this knowledge with the world. Bloggers fall into this category too.
We all have in common, of course, that we are developers, no matter if beginner or super-advanced.
But only few people (I think) fall into the categories "author" AND "asker". For me this is the case. I have questions only in very rare cases and most of the time I can't get an answer, some are too specific, some too wide spread.
If people know lots of things, they rarely have questions, they tend to become authors and help others.
However, there's one point in this system that doesn't make much sense to me.
I'm Gold-Author (yesyes not platin, but still...) but have almost no status in "Enquirer" and "Editor" as my articles don't get much rework - I put most of the work into my articles in the first place, and even lesser it's that I have a question on something.
But to have (active) links in your Bio you need to have bronze grade in *all* site categories. For me this would mean, I have to "invent" 80(!) more questions just to get the bronze... I can't imagine to have so many questions... I had 2 or 3 in the last 5 years... It's out of my lifetime to get that 
Same for Editor.
So I wanted to ask you to take a look at the requirement for live links in the bio to change it.
Maybe... hmm I don't know - Being Gold in at least one or two categories, or at least silver in 3 categories.
But I find it not good, "bronze in all" as I can't imagine being so active in *all* categories - people HAVE questions or people ANSWER questions --- I think that's the point.
sorry for my bad english
cheers, Mike
You know nothing, Jon Snow.
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Barthold wrote: But to have (active) links in your Bio you need to have bronze grade in *all* site categories.
I believe that you are misunderstanding the privileges tab. You need to have at least Bronze in any reputation category (or Silver in Participant), not Bronze in all categories.
The quick brown ProgramFOX jumps right over the Lazy<Dog>.
|
|
|
|
|
No thats not the case - I tried it in my bio - links do not work... but it's still possible that I simply did it wrong
Wait... I have an idea -- let me try something... brb in 2 minutes.
...two minutes have past...
*cough* you are to right... man! Ok I will put a question now: "How do I create a hyperlink?" 
You know nothing, Jon Snow.
|
|
|
|
|
Glad I could help you!
The quick brown ProgramFOX jumps right over the Lazy<Dog>.
|
|
|
|
|
Excellent summary and observation. As others have said, though:
Quote: Members need to achieve at least one of the given member levels in the given reputation categories in order to perform a given action
(From the privileges page itself)
The rep system was setup specifically because of the categories you mentioned. Some post, some answer, some write. Some just hang out and keep us company. In the end it all adds up to being valued in our community, and so we try and recognise the different ways people help us grow and flourish.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
