|
I think CPHog allows you to print comments.
Trinity: Neo... nobody has ever done this before.
Neo: That's why it's going to work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've seen that happen when a link uses codeproject.com instead of www.codeproject.com. Since I normally access the site with www.codeproject.com, any time I visit a page with just codeproject.com, that page can't see my cookie from www.codeproject.com, and therefore doesn't know my message board settings.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Chris,
I must have way too much time on my hands. I think it may bee a good idea to add a 'thumbs down' icon next to the 1 rating, and a 'thumbs up' icon next to the 5. I feel it is a little cleaner than appending 'out of 5'.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, you have way too much time on your hands 
I'll add it to the suggestions box though
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
I happened to search for 'Walton' (my namesake) in Authors. The suggestion may seem petty, but keep in mind that it is used when one votes to rate an article or Message Board post.
Both accounts are mine. The first is used regularly. The second was used at a time I hosed my password (until Chris got my email address on record fixed so I could rest my password).
Comparison:
Jeffrey Walton (me)
Gold
15 Articles
400 Messages (OK - I don't hang out in the Lounge)
17 April 2003
jwalton
Gold
0 articles
5 Messages
23 July 2003
|
|
|
|
|
This is a tricky one. I want to completely scrap the current method of awarding levels and replace it with one based on contribution and participation. Doing so will upset all those who feel they have earned their status based on their time here.
Do I do what is most sensible, or do I do what will make most members happy?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Chris,
Chris Maunder wrote: Doing so will upset all those who feel they have earned their status based on their time here.
In this case, perhaps the best solution is to leave the time award in place. Then, add an additional category between Gold and Platinum
This way, underachievers can stay at Gold. Others can move on to the Platinum and Uranium levels...
The effect is those who do a little more move beyond the underachievers, while not moving into the territory of the Michael Dunns.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Do I do what is most sensible, or do I do what will make most members happy?
Is the "levels" thing supposed to just be a random ego boost? Or is it supposed to actually be useful for putting some perceived "weight" behind replies...?
----
Yes, but can you blame them for doing so if that's the only legal way they can hire programmers they want at the rate they can afford?-- Nish on sketchy hiring practices
|
|
|
|
|
It's meant to distinguish between those who contribute to the site and who value and want to protect the integrity of the site and those who are newcomers.
So your point is taken 
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
I know this has come up in the context of non-English speaking contributors in an effort to improve article quality. I'm all for it, as long as it does not become a personal attack on nationals other than English speakers. I also submit that the non-English speaking author has a better command of English than I have of his/her native tongue. So I am humbled by my own ignorance...
However, Subject Matter is a different story. I have a good understanding in some arenas. This knowledge extends sufficiently so that I feel I can provide feedbck and advice. One such area is Cryptography.
I am appaled at some of the articles submitted on Cryptography. In the following, I am not singling out the authors. I am trying to make a succint point.
The latest is TrueCrypt Explorer[^]. This library is using source code and presumably home grown ciphers from the notorius Tom St. Dennis of sci.crypt. Single handedly, he nearly ruined the usenet group with his arrogance and ignorance.
I assume the author is not versed on Cryptography, and as such has fallen victim to TSD's 'Proof by Intimidation' of his cryptosystem. I am not aware of a Cryptanalytic effort by any reputable cryptographer on his work.
Build your own cryptographically safe server/client protocol[^] is misleading because the author states something to the nature he is collecting 'true randomness', which is generally not possible in software.
CTrueRandom - Getting True Random Numbers[^] claims it generates 'True Random Numbers'. I assume the author meant nondeterminsitic method, similar to the noise resisitor placed on the hardware based PRNG board of a RS6000.
As a final example, I point you toward The Art & Science of Storing Passwords[^], where the article claims the practice of storing a password for recover on disk unencrypted is OK. This must be Art, because it is not good science.
I use the term Proofer, rather than Editor, because this should be a voluntary system - not CodeProject censorship. Also, it is not a CodeProject Editor per se.
In addition, perhaps a proofing could add a value to the members standing. For example, 1 Proofing = 25 messages posted or something silmilar.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Since what you're proposing is voluntary, I have no real problem with it, although I think it would be unfortunate to deprive people of the critical commentary made in the "backchannel" proofing messages (at least, I'm assuming they would be backchannel - please correct me if I'm wrong).
If the critical comments were posted in the article forum, then everyone would benefit - especially if the author chose to ignore the comments. If a backchannel was used, then no one would be aware of the critical comments made by SMEs, and so might use the article, thinking it was ok.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Hans,
I was hoping to catch it before the release as a sidebar converstion. It has been my experience that when I draw attention to the glaring errors, the author will engage me in the Comments area and not fix his or her code.
Some of this stuff is not my mere opinion - I'll cite FIPS, ISO, etc.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
Reference: A Console Application HTML Parser Using Microsoft's XML Technologies[^].
I've got the right margin run off thing going on. It is obvious where the problem lies - a discussion of 'Sample 5' about 2/3 the way down the article - it is "Preformatted".
However, I am not able to:
* Remove the formatting through the editor
* Toggle between HTML and WYSIWYG mode
* Save anything on the article (silently discarded)
Any help would be appreciated.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Jeffrey Walton wrote: * Save anything on the article (silently discarded)
Thinking about this last night, the Editor may be reintroducing the same mistake, which makes it appear the save is not occuring...
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed it... I wasn't being patient enough when switching between HTML WYSIWUG and Code View.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Sean,
Sean Ewington wrote: Is all well now Jeffrey?
Yes.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plus I can't modify it. It doesn't show who created it. And I think it should show it's path as being under a certain category.
I just this if I try to modify:
You do not have permission to edit this article
|
|
|
|
|
I resubmitted it and at least for now it seems to be working again.
|
|
|
|
|
I did a search on your name and I saw this article come up.
Are there any more problems? Let me know.
- Sean Ewington
Lead Technical Editor
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
This one is not of much consequence (unless of course you are charged with the backup and disaster recovery plan at CodeProject).
I like to keep my articles tidy (including what is stored on the back end). It would be nice to be able to delete unused items.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Added to TODO
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Was just browsing through the Links section at the very bottom of the General DotNet Articles Page (http://www.codeproject.com/dotnet/) and a lot of them point to "Page Not Found" or something similar.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
