|
That's because the author rewrote it and republished it.
|
|
|
|
|
This inquirer of Questions & Answer forum
http://www.codeproject.com/Members/tomay3000[^]
posts this question:
Visual Studio 2012 Import resource problem !!![^].
I warned OP about using unsafe practice. I don't really think the OP should be banned for this, but it's better to keep an eye on such things. Using executable files from such sources is really very dangerous.
I must apologize for my own violation: this time, I place a post for not an answer as a solution. I just though it's better to warn some potentially reckless members from using the file. Sorry.
[EDIT #1]
I am updating my the present report in response to OP's comment:
tomay3000 wrote: Don't judge people on their religion, their country or even their SKULL avatar I have spent many time creating this demo illustration to make you understand my issue, because I am not good in english with just text.
I have created this demo using Instant Demo which gives you the ability to export your demo in many different format including .EXE, so I have choosed the .EXE format with Adobe Flash Player included.Here is its website: http://www.instant-demo.com
Any one who suspect an .EXE file to be malicious may try it inside the SandBox first, and not a quick judgement from the first time.
I have uploaded another file; a .ZIP file that contains the demo in the .SWF format which can be viewed in your web browser by clicking the .HTM file.
So please delete your abuse report about this question.
Thank you for your understanding.
I'm sorry to conclude that the case is hopeless. This inquirer suggests that someone should create a virtual sandbox machine to resolve the problem only OP is really interested in, while the fix of this unsafe post could be done in minutes. And virtually accused me in something like racism, on totally baseless matters.
Importantly, such behavior is just dangerous. Please see my comment below, in comments section.
[EDIT #2]
Later on, I was very satisfied that OP realized what was wrong: tomay3000 wrote: I am very sorry for my antisocial behavior, that's not what I meant, I didn't know how to make an idea clear.
Actually I am using Google translator to correct my text paragraphs.
And about my ignorance about safety practice, that's true, I have learned that today in this post, and I will be more careful next time.
Thank you.
This is a really decent attitude, respond to criticism, openly admitted mistakes and drawing right conclusions. Very good.
If OP also removes the link to .EXE file, this minor conflict is over. Things are getting normal.
And this is great!
—SASergey A Kryukov
modified 2-Jan-13 12:13pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I have updated my question to prove my innocence
Tomay is Back
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a person actively fighting against spam, please see my recent short article:
A Plan for Spam[^].
This is a serious initial proposal for solving the CodeProject spam problem.
I would be interesting to here from your: what do you think, exchange some ideas.
Thank you,
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All entries on your list nuked
Regards.
--------
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpfull answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you, Nelek.
As a person actively fighting against spam, please see my recent short article:
A Plan for Spam[^].
This is a serious initial proposal for solving the CodeProject spam problem.
I would be interesting to here from your: what do you think, exchange some ideas.
Thank you,
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
He is back, but not with a friendly URL this time:
Sema Khan[^]
Here are a couple of new ones:
Member 9721867[^]
nirala15gbh[^]
Shalee Sanchez[^]
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
modified 2-Jan-13 14:09pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Reported, thank you.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
|
Except Sema Khan other 3 are still live
Jibesh V P
|
|
|
|
|
Soren,
As a person actively fighting against spam, please see my recent short article:
A Plan for Spam[^].
This is a serious initial proposal for solving the CodeProject spam problem.
I would be interesting to here from your: what do you think, exchange some ideas.
Thank you,
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
I've gone in with a mop and bucket and cleaned up the mess in QA and the forums. Can I ask two things:
1. Don't edit posts. Just delete or report them. And obviously, don't reply to them.
2. If you see any prior to today that are still visible, please let me know and I'll tweak my filters to catch them too.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Based on current report count, following still remains:
Sema Khan[^] - 6 votes (This name keeps popping up!)
Lili Gomes[^] - 7 votes
valobasa[^] - 6 votes
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.codeproject.com/Members/tvfanatics[^] is still alive
Regards.
--------
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpfull answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Not anymore.
0100000101101110011001000111001011101001
|
|
|
|
|
André,
As a person actively fighting against spam, please see my recent short article:
A Plan for Spam[^].
This is a serious initial proposal for solving the CodeProject spam problem.
I would be interesting to here from your: what do you think, exchange some ideas.
Thank you,
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
I don't see any spam, but some of the profiles I reported in an earlier post are still active. Sorry for repeating these, but they seem to be overlooked:
dsgfasdf[^]
waskagmen[^]
ufc155[^]
Member 9718231[^]
Tonmoy Saha[^]
livetv115[^]
**** Update: All these accounts are now gone. Thank you for putting them out of their misery  .
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
modified 1-Jan-13 16:15pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I've read this post too late, just edited some of them. But if you think we should not, I'll stop it. It was the idea of one other member, I though it was not a bad one.
What do you think about the following problem:
When and if we remove all posts of all offenders, there is no evidence of spam left. A lot of offender's accounts was removed due to member's abuse reports, but I cannot be sure that all members will trust the report if there is no evidence of spamming. Unfortunately, sometimes we can see such thing as "hatred voting". What if somebody reports a good member as one of spammers? Even if you have some spamming evidence in the database (I don't know), the members don't see it… What do you think?
And please see my next post, at the moment of writing, on top of list. I suggest you start to ban some user names permanently, at least some of them.
Thank you. Happy New Year!
SA—Sergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
I understand your concern regarding members being nuked by hatred voting, but if messages are left in a viewable state then the spammers get what they are after: listings on Google and Bing.
The guys who are jumping on these spammers all seem a very sensible lot. Let's see if there's a problem with hatred voting to close accounts before we modify the approach to fix a problem that may not be there.
I've also incapacitated the Sema account.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Chris.
I understand that. That explains why immediate removal of spam posts is a priority. It's convincing. My concern was not hatred voting itself. My concern is possible false negative/positive in removing spammers' accounts. This whole spamming problems needs thinking.
Thank you,
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov wrote: This whole spamming problems needs thinking
It does. Every time I try and think of something automated I always seem to fall back to a point where a human check is needed so we don't nuke accounts. As soon as human intervention is needed the whole thing seems to collapse down to simply having keen-eyed members nuke the messages.
Initially I had it so that accounts were automatically nuked after a certain number of spam messages were found, but this definitely caused false-positives, so I reverted back to separating the flagging of the message and the flagging of the accont. I do have some automatic checks on new posts, with some basic checks to ensure the posts of regular members aren't checked, but even then we've had cases where accounts are compromised and used for spamming purposes.
A foolproof algorithm, or even workflow, would be nice!
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
