|
The swine. He's keeping her to himself. It's not as though he hasn't got enough attractive young ladies around the CP office - it seems the talent pool in Canada is much higher, so they really do have gorgeous 26 year old PhD nuclear physicists just hanging around at CP central waiting to defuse the bomb.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx
|
|
|
|
|
Do ... do you really think I'm gorgeous?
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
Babe - I'm licking the screen right now, you love god, you.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx
|
|
|
|
|
I also know how to diffuse bombs.
No big deal.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Ewington wrote: I also know how to diffuse bombs.
For your own safety I would suggest learning how to defuse them! 
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
They are much better when viewed through a soft filter.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: They are much better when viewed through a soft filter.
A bit like those lingerie shots that Sean had taken of himself.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: A bit like those lingerie shots that Sean had taken of himself.
You mean you peeped?
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
User varungates[^] has posted two items under the Interviews category of Tips/Tricks. Both have no content except a link that my company's webblocker won't let me access. I am assuming good faith posts to the promised content, but I can't be sure. Thought I would bring it to your attention.
|
|
|
|
|
All is fine there.
|
|
|
|
|
Good to know. Is there any way I can withdraw my downvotes?
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think you can. On articles and messages, and probably also on Q&A and T&T, you can revote, the new vote then replaces the older one; but you can't "unvote".
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, deleting the "My vote of 1" comments seems to have done the trick.
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, I forgot to mention that: if you manage to delete the reply/answer that holds the vote, the vote is gone. However that fails if the reply has been replied to, or the answer has been edited by somebody else.
|
|
|
|
|
can this somehow be prevented?
Reason is that these really old questions get bumped up to the latest tab and this is pretty irksome. There is one question right now on the first page that was asked a full 4 months ago!
Or can a custom filter be added to sort by posted date alone?
|
|
|
|
|
This has been bothering me too. Perhaps implement a mechanism where questions get closed after, say, 30 days of inactivity? Closed items could not be edited or answered.
|
|
|
|
|
These generally doesn't happen. Probably these happened because of recent SPAM flood... It should be back to normal once the issue is totally resolved.
|
|
|
|
|
It DOES happen, I just found myself answering a question from jul 2009, because someone had found it necessary to add an answer to it. Realised halfway through the answer that this was a pointless exercise. We really need a sell-by-date on those questions. Closing down after 20 days of inactivity?
|
|
|
|
|
Michel Godfroid wrote: Realised halfway through the answer that this was a pointless exercise. We really need a sell-by-date on those questions
I agree to that. It's just that i was talking of too many question from last week or so coming back again and again.
Michel Godfroid wrote: Closing down after 20 days of inactivity
That might be a little too short. Might be a month or so. Either answered or not, they should be removed/archived. This was suggested around a month back or so. Probably it may be in the To-do list! Lets see!
|
|
|
|
|
Found the culprit[^]. He's been inactive for a long time, and since recently he seems to be working through the QA in chronological order. Can someone fire a mail off to him (I can't since he only posts in QA, and that does not allow you to reply)
|
|
|
|
|
It might be not intentional. He must have used the 'COM' filter and got back those unanswered questions there. He must have just went ahead and replied them. Looks like he is an expert in that!
From his profile, it doesn't look like he will be after reputation points or so. Already 5+ exp here and quite experienced. I think it would be wrong to call him 'culprit'!
|
|
|
|
|
I wasn't using culprit in a negative sense. And his answers are competent. That's why I suggested a mail, in order not to get everyone involved in a flame competition.
|
|
|
|
|
Michel Godfroid wrote: I wasn't using culprit in a negative sense
Ok! got that... 
Just wanted to share with you whatever I observed.
|
|
|
|
|
He's not the only one, and certainly not the most prolific. I have challenged someone in the past about this but it seems they don't like being given orders. I guess we have to live with it.
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
How about we just fix it so old messages don't bubble up?
I like that people are continuing to give old messages some lovin'
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
