|
Thank you, Soren
That explains it.
I guess I will have to think carefully if I should report the member and see what happens
If anybody has any advice please jump in (moderators?)
Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
I've just seen this thread, so I apologise if it seems like I'm late to the party. I have, on occasion, deleted comments from QA. There are two instances where I do so.
1. If the comment is blatantly abusive.
2. If the comment is spam.
If I can delete comments, then so can many others.
I also delete questions for the same reasons, plus one other - if it's a repost with no answers to it, and the original post has answers. In this particular case, I always put a comment on the question before I delete it (ths poster will receive a notification with my explanatino for why I deleted it).
Finally, and not wanting to bad mouth the guy, many many people have had run ins with this particular individual. A lot of the time, he gives good answers - he's just not receptive to not lecturing others.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Pete for the explanation.
A lot of the time this particular individual gives useless answers too, which is understandable given the rate at which his answers are coming out. Probably barely has time to think before typing.
Well, maybe personal vendetta is not justified in this case then. But I find it discouraging to see my comment deleted, when his much more disparaging (IMO) comments can stand on the same thread/exchange.
Anyhow, thank you I might reserve "Report user" till next time
Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
Talking about this post here:
Clicketity[^]
I am not sure about that and to be honest I somehow don't get what the OP wants to tell us...
Edit: Just seen that SoMad has posted this in the Spam forum. Case cleared
modified 21-Feb-13 17:31pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Is it possible to compare a changed article up for approval with the latest public release of that article?
I am unable to find an option like comparing the different revisions of a published article.
I am looking at this approval http://www.codeproject.com/script/Articles/ArticleVersion.aspx?waid=62879&aid=325876[^].
If I compare it outside CP I can only find the removal off one space from the end off the first sentence.
0100000101101110011001000111001011101001
|
|
|
|
|
Click on the Revisions link on the left. From there you can do a Compare and it will show up in a side-by-side view.
Unfortunately the header above the revisions shows the same date and time, but I assume the content is correctly chosen from the revisions being compared.
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
Can someone somehow slow him down. I don't think a full ban is needed but a gentle nudge may help to slow him down and get him back on side.
Reality is an illusion caused by a lack of alcohol
|
|
|
|
|
Link to an example?
Got it.
And so have 3 others. He'll get the message in another couple of posts I reckon.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
24 hours later, William is sober enough to check the link. 
Reality is an illusion caused by a lack of alcohol
|
|
|
|
|
A particular user has been identified as using sock puppets to target people who don't vote 5 for his article. I tried to talk to the user to explain that these accounts have been identified as sock puppets, but he's behaved the same way to me as he has to others. I feel that his behaviour is abusing the site, so I have marked his account as abuse accordingly. If I'm wrong about the sock puppets, could you please remove my abuse vote from his account - otherwise, could you have a word about his behaviour? He's already made the list in the Spam and Abuse forum.
Details here[^].
|
|
|
|
|
He has sent me two private messages. One in which he wants me to ask you to contact him in private.
If you wish to do so, you need to tell me where to send his message.
"The ones who care enough to do it right care too much to compromise."
Matthew Faithfull
|
|
|
|
|
I believe he's also got in touch with Chris and Sean. I'll let them sort it out.
|
|
|
|
|
If you feel his priv-messages are out of order, you should forward them to Chris as well.
|
|
|
|
|
The messages are not abusive.
I'll let Chris handle it.
I just hope I'm wrong about the whole thing and that we're dealing with someone misguided that has unknowingly used a bug in the system.
"The ones who care enough to do it right care too much to compromise."
Matthew Faithfull
|
|
|
|
|
I hope so as well. The reason I posted here was so that Chris could step in and check the logs. All we have is guess work and supposition based on some "odd" patterns. Who knows, maybe 2+2 equals 5 in this particular instance.
|
|
|
|
|
Let's hope that's how it is.
While having high tolerance to content, I'm having low tolerance to misuse... and even lower to being wrong.
"The ones who care enough to do it right care too much to compromise."
Matthew Faithfull
|
|
|
|
|
We're never wrong. We're just not yet proved right. 
|
|
|
|
|
I like your thinking. 
"The ones who care enough to do it right care too much to compromise."
Matthew Faithfull
|
|
|
|
|
This user has contacted Sean and I via email and phone. I've replied letting him know we'll investigate the situation and take whatever action is needed.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I'd like to ask for you to reactivate his account. Michael got in touch with me earlier this morning and apologised, and that takes a big man. As I said, I don't think his articles are that bad, and I believe that he's been a little overenthusiastic and I would hate to see us loose a valuable resource over something so stupid as this. I was wrong to vote his account as abusive, and I would like to take this opportunity to publicly apologise to Michael for doing so; I badly overreacted thinking that he didn't want help, when the reality appears to be that he misunderstood what I was trying to say and that was my fault for not being clear enough. I'd hate to see him be punished over my fault.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: Michael got in touch with me earlier this morning and apologised, and that takes
a big man
No, that takes a man that just got his account suspended.
When he apologises to all the people whos messages he has removed I might reconsider.
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: I badly overreacted thinking that he didn't want help
Until I'm proven wrong I believe he removed messages systematically.
"The ones who care enough to do it right care too much to compromise."
Matthew Faithfull
|
|
|
|
|
Jörgen Andersson wrote: I believe he removed messages systematically.
He admitted that as well, and sees that this behaviour isn't in keeping with what we want in the site. Better late than never.
|
|
|
|
|
He and I have discussed this. He was overzealous in his recruiting of friends to perform actions that go against the spirit of the site. It was wrong, he gets it, and I think everyone's sorry at how messy this became.
Let's just move on.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, case dismissed, I'm glad it's settled.
But allow me a slightly more technical question.
Was it a "bug" that allowed him to nuke messages in one go? Because I no longer believe in my original thought, that he used sock puppets for that purpose.
"The ones who care enough to do it right care too much to compromise."
Matthew Faithfull
|
|
|
|
|
That sounds like a result to me. For my part, I regret my actions. It's easy for me to forget that not everyone speaks the same colloquial brand of English as I do, so he was hurt and offended by my contact. Lesson learnt, and thank you for reactivating his account.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
