|
Here is one more article mentioned by Rahman:
[^]
This also has highest rating, i have to congrajulate him as he is not stucked to spammers like you, than his article.
The rating are 200+, comments are made daily 3-4 hours gap, thought you guys say this also spam as some pattern there,
I strongly recommend code project to remove sick spammers like you as good articles are losing it's value
|
|
|
|
|
Added to the suspicious nature of the votes, every one of the "5" votes was created the same day, and each of them has left a total of 1 message... on this article. That's not just suspicious, that is just ludicrous. Perhaps this is a situation where Chris needs to have one of his "chats" with this OP after checking out the internal statistics on the 5 vote accounts.
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
Cut the guy a break. It's totally possible that two people with the same uncommon last name would create an account on the same day just to upvote his article, one after the other. Just like it is possible that all the molecules of air in a room might all decide to go to one corner of the room at the same time, causing the occupant to suffocate. Totally possible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Miracles[^] do happen...
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
Who would define a solution expert? One of the great things about the article rating system is that it's a democracy - everyone gets a chance to have a say, and if an article is good then it doesn't need an "expert" to say so. A good article is one that educates someone - it shouldn't matter whether or not the person reading it is an expert, at the end of the article, they should be able to say "I get it. I see how this was put together. Very clever."
Or do you think that only a supposed expert should be clever enough to understand an article? If so, you've just decided that articles shouldn't be available for everyone. Should we have tests to see if someone's clever enough to read an article.
|
|
|
|
|
I dono how it is benfiting you or someone my friend, what i am saying is if you say i wanna be judge, you should have fair understanding on subject, in a reality show you have seen, the people who score are mainly judges, not anyone just like that,
Here one more thing is he want to abuse me purposefully and made some comments which led to so many unwanted conversation and replies
|
|
|
|
|
kishhr wrote: if you say i wanna be judge, you should have fair understanding on subject
Turn that round. Surely, by the end of your article you should have enough understanding of what the article is about to be able to judge it. If I don't understand your article at the end, then the problem is with the article. There's an old adage:
"If the learner hasn't learnt, the teacher hasn't taught."
Think about it.
Don't take criticism personally - at the end of the day, why does it matter to you what someone else thinks or says about your article? Do you use it to improve as an author, or do you sit in a corner and sulk. My first articles stunk, and fortunately people were kind enough to give me criticism - that has helped me to grow as an author and I'd like to think my later efforts are much better. The important thing to try and do is understand why people have commented the way they did, and to take that and use it to improve.
|
|
|
|
|
I am not bothered with comment, someone said wow, some other had different opinion, the main thing is the topic is very broad, and embedding within article is a challenge, i made ppl. to familarize with many stuffs there, i have also given explaination of why it's presented like that.
What i didn't liked is he says you you have fabricated the comments, that's not a fair comment, different ppl. will have different perspective, what i see, you may not see, or vice versa, the article has be written keep diverse set of audience in mind and try to give max. converage to get them familiar with stuffs
|
|
|
|
|
Anyone get angry if someone comments or rates without any proper base, this has everything what it needs
|
|
|
|
|
It might be my first article presented but i have seen so many articles and have written with understanding of it's all plus and flaws.
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is wrong with that? Windows has a built-in feature of being able to recover an account when you have forgotten your password. The nice thing is that if somebody else does it you will know because your password will have changed. In fact, I needed to do this once, but was able to recover my password because it was saved when I used remote desktop from one computer to another.
This could be a very useful article/tip.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, that makes sense then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I saw that too, but was not sure how to handle it. Judges?
Soren Madsen
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe just marking as abuse as OriginalGriff suggested below.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Marked as abuse.
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
|
|
|
|
|
|
Strange how that same answer gets hit again n again! I wonder if there is some algo being followed and that question fits in it.
|
|
|
|
|
Could be - then again, it could be manual. The spam itself is pretty primitive so it could be a Chinese spam farm (if such a thing exists, and it probably does)
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
