|
This question looks legitimate and it even got some answers:
Can you recommend a .net template[^].
But I strongly suspect the real purpose of it was to promote a commercial Web site. Please follow the referenced site to see.
Am I right? If so, it would be the real spam, something we don't want here.
Thank you,
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
I've edited the question to remove the link.
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps this was a reasonable conservative action, as we cannot be 100% it's a spam.
Thank you,
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Good. But one person can post the question and a condeferate can post an "answer".
Ah, well, nothing we can do about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Odd. That link leads me right back here.  Anyone else see this, or is Firefox acting up again? Or have the link hamsters gone on strike?
EDIT: now it leads me back to this message!  What the hell is going on?!!?!
Correct Link.[^]
It was a bad link.
I think computer viruses should count as life. I think it says something about human nature that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. We've created life in our own image.
Stephen Hawking
|
|
|
|
|
There are several instances of spam in the free text answers in the current survey. Go get 'em (Whoever can actually get 'em)
I think computer viruses should count as life. I think it says something about human nature that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. We've created life in our own image.
Stephen Hawking
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The "question" was nuked but the account is still active, at this time.
Why is common sense not common?
Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level where they are an expert.
Sometimes it takes a lot of work to be lazy
Please stand in front of my pistol, smile and wait for the flash - JSOP 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Account Nuked.
I think computer viruses should count as life. I think it says something about human nature that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. We've created life in our own image.
Stephen Hawking
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the culprit[^]
Peter
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not so sure. Could well be an innocent newbie who doesn't grok the rules, so I'm not pinging him for that post. Maybe a gentle enquiring comment to his answer would be in order.
Peter
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with Sandeep. I have seen several answers like that from members who signed up the same day, posted a leadtools favored answer and never did anything else.
Soren Madsen
|
|
|
|
|
Fair enough. I hadn't noticed a pattern.
Peter
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
Over the past few days a number of articles have been posted (current Bugs/Suggestions posts one of them: Why you should rewrite your code for the new C++ 11 && operator[^]) that have been really poor quality or just not up to scratch. I have just reported the following tip/trick as incomplete as it is missing the required downloads and is just not a good tip/trick really:
Simple Flash Uploader[^]
How on earth did that slip through the net? There is even a report option in the approvals process for missing downloads/images! It seems that there is suddenly a number of unknown (to me) members that are abusing the approvals process and allowing poor quality articles to be published. I think this should be investigated to find out who or what is causing this reasonably sudden and recent degradation in the approvals system.
Thanks,
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
