|
It appears that, occasionally, someone decides to spend the day posting new threads on CP. Regardless of how interesting he might find the seventy-two links to "My Life as a CP Hamster," or how many times he emphasizes that his homework is "RGNT", or how quickly he leaves the ranks of bronze members, there comes a point where the forum begins to look like his/her personal blog.
If a relatively simple way could be imposed that would keep the user from starting more than say a half-dozen threads in a single day (or X threads in a Y length of time) it might go a long way towards restoring civility in all the forums, including SB.
It's a thought and probably worth only what you paid for it.
Jon
Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
|
|
|
|
|
While we are at it, why not limit the number of messages one can post in Lounge and Soapbox
to the number of messages the same person has already posted in programming forums and article sections.
Should this site really spend a significant part of its facilities to people who don't contribute
to the programming forums and article sections?
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: While we are at it, why not limit the number of messages one can post in Lounge and Soapbox to the number of messages the same person has already posted in programming forums and article sections.
Why not limit the number of messages one can post in programming forums and article sections to the number of messages the same person has already posted in Lounge and Soapbox.
The answer, imho, in both cases would be that the programming forums and the message-board forums serve different purposes. N'est-ce pas?
By the way, how much credit would you give, if any, to someone who carefully reviewed a new article, including downloading the attached code, running and possibly stepping through it, and performing repeated googles to insure a lack of plagiarism? It could easily take an hour or two, before reporting or approving an article. Dashing off a few answers, especially one to the "RGNT PLS HLP" folks would take considerably less time and effort, don't you think?
Jon
Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
|
|
|
|
|
From "What is the CodeProject?"[^] I quote:
The Code Project is a community of Visual Studio and .NET developers joined together with certain common goals: to learn, to teach and to have fun programming. Developers from all over the world come together to share source code, tutorials and knowledge for free to help their fellow programmers.
So it is about programming, I don't see two purposes.
I don't mind there is a Lounge and a Soapbox, I do mind the site's performance is degraded by an overload
of traffic in Lounge and Soapbox, and I notice lots of people are active in there (almost) exclusively.
Hence, my suggestion to limit the messages in L/SB based on real programming contributions.
Oakman wrote: how much credit would you give ...
I seem to miss your point. I'll give full credit to programming efforts, replies, comments, the lot.
If you spend a significant effort in reviewing something, then by all means let the world know, and
share your opinion. Add one or more messages to the article's blog or the forum's thread,
and report it in the Lounge if you will.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: I don't mind there is a Lounge and a Soapbox, I do mind the site's performance is degraded by an overload of traffic in Lounge and Soapbox,
Law of Unintended Consequences: If the change you propose went through either a number of active members would leave - ultimately costing Chris advertising revenue; or discussions in the programming forums would be about any subject whatsoever.
Luc Pattyn wrote: I seem to miss your point
Totally.
Jon
Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
|
|
|
|
|
Oakman wrote: a number of active members would leave
active at what, that is the question.
Marketing isn't just about numbers, it is about reaching the target audience too.
Anyway, I fail to see how the number of members can be very relevant, as membership is free, and creating
new accounts is fast and easy.
Oakman wrote: or discussions in the programming forums would be about any subject whatsoever.
We don't want that.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: I fail to see how the number of members can be very relevant
It's about the number of active members - the same people you are complaining about.
Luc Pattyn wrote: We don't want that.
And presumably, that's why there are non-programming forums
Jon
Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
|
|
|
|
|
Oakman wrote: It's about the number of active members - the same people you are complaining about.
active at what? dealing with programming issues or chatting away?
Oakman wrote: that's why there are non-programming forums
and that is fine by me, until the moment they become the majority of storage and bandwidth needs
in a site that after all is meant to be a programming site.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: active at what? dealing with programming issues or chatting away?
Either way, they are viewing the ads - this was about marketing, did you forget?
Luc Pattyn wrote: until the moment they become the majority of storage and bandwidth needs
in a site that after all is meant to be a programming site.
You really should get your connection checked or upgraded.
Jon
Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
|
|
|
|
|
Oakman wrote: non-programming forums
To me, that is the one thing that makes CP unique when compared to other programming sites. It has the programming forums, and it also has forums that people can do online, virtual chit chat at their own leisure with other developers.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
I have got to take umbrage with this
Paul Conrad wrote: virtual chit chat at their own leisure with other developers
The lounge is good value for this but the bloody soapbox seems to be on 2 subjects (both futile in my opinion) US politics and Islam as a religion. And yeah if it wasn't there the crap would leak into the Lounge, I know, I know!
I wonder just what % the SB in resources!
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Mycroft Holmes wrote: I wonder just what % the SB in resources!
I suspect that, compared to the lounge, it's pretty small. And, when you estimate that some, if not all, posts presently housed by SB would find their way to the Lounge, it gets even smaller.
Jon
Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
|
|
|
|
|
Oakman wrote: it's pretty small
Here is one way to probably estimate it:
1) Pick a date and time, take note of it.
2) Take note of the individual message counts for each forum.
3) Take note of the message counts in each forum a set time later ( hour, day, week later ).
4) Look at the rates they fill with questions/posts/messages/etc.
Just a quick idea
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
Mycroft Holmes wrote: I wonder just what % the SB in resources!
Not sure if it is very much. I remember seeing something about Chris having several different servers running, so I'm sure he's got it set to hand some pretty serious load.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: limit the messages in L/SB
That would make it rather dull.
Luc Pattyn wrote: messages in L/SB based on real programming contributions
Then you'd get the trolls putting crap messages/replies in the programming forums just so they can post in the other forums.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Conrad wrote: Then you'd get the trolls putting crap messages/replies in the programming forums just so they can post in the other forums.
Yes there is that risk.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, there is the risk, and it seems the forums are pretty self moderating anyways. Look at what happened to the guy who cross-posted and spammed the forums today.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
If you don't like the Soapbox simply stay away from it. What's to be gained by the sort or draconian regulation you're suggesting? Fair enough, the CodeProject is primarily a programming site, but that doesn't mean that there's no place for the Soapbox. People know what to expect when they go to the Soapbox, and what’s more I suggest that it actually enhances the programming forums by drawing trouble makers away from them and allowing people to blow off some steam.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Steve,
I am not against the existence of L/SB, my suggestion[^] was just to limit the resources taken by L/SB
to a reasonable share. Right now they carry two thirds of the messages, which seems a bit much
for a programming site.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: Right now they carry two thirds of the messages, which seems a bit much
for a programming site.
Sure, from the perspective of over time. I put together an Excel spreadsheet watching the fill rates of the individual forums, and since 8:00AM my time ( now 9:10PM ), Lounge has 507 new messages, and Soapbox has 165 new messages since that time this morning. Doubt it is any real resource hog except for space.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Hewitt wrote: don't like the Soapbox simply stay away from it
Exactly. I go there just for entertainment purposes and playful jabs, not entirely serious there
Stephen Hewitt wrote: it actually enhances the programming forums by drawing trouble makers away from them and allowing people to blow off some steam.
Yes, remember when Kyle used to be in the programming forums and what kind of mess that was sometimes?
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
Oakman wrote: "RGNT PLS HLP" folks would take considerably less time and effort
They end up getting moderated by the community, though.
Oakman wrote: repeated googles to insure a lack of plagiarism?
That's not too tough to do for the most part.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
Also, limit the number of article downloads to the number of article uploads. [Yes, I'm joking.] The point is, this site is well-known for its openness. And yes, that sometimes causes concern about the quality of posts and even the quality of people that CP attracts.
But put it in perspective. How many mediocre posters would you be willing to put up with, if you knew that CP would also attract some world-class programmers? Personally, my threshold is not even close.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Hans,
my remark was not inspired by a concern for quality of contributions, but rather by the purpose
of this web site, and its performance. I fail to see how Lounge and Soapbox, carrying some two thirds
of the total number of messages, sufficiently contribute to the goal of this site.
See also above for my previous reply.
Regards,
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: my remark was not inspired by a concern for quality of contributions
The thread above this one ("Spammer") refers to someone who has posted over 40 messages, recently, most of them in programming forums. Since he fits your guidelines to a "T", I would certainly have to agree with that part of your post, quoted above.
The problem of poor performance (one that I seldom experience, by the way, so perhaps we are dealing with your connection and not the server load at all) is solved not by eliminating a large number of users (i.e. ad revenue), but by upgrading the hardware. Something that Chris seems quite willing to do whenever circumstances warrant.
Jon
Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
