|
Why am I posting this here, rather in "Spam and Abuse:" well, it ties in, I think, with the broader discussion going on about anonymous voting.
Example: [^].
Note you cannot tell who added the tag, and I seriously doubt the OP tagged his own post "No Effort" !
I've been on a bit of a crusade against this practice, at times just clearing tags like this myself.
An obvious fix would be to have the same thing happen that happens when you edit someone's post with a new version being recorded ?
thanks, Bill
«What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning» Werner Heisenberg
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: block anonymous re-tagging of QA posts with insulting remarks
Insulting remarks won't do it.
Peter Wasser
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell
|
|
|
|
|
pwasser wrote: Insulting remarks won't do it.
Do you understand that I am reporting an action by some 3rd. party who has edited a QA question and added insulting content in the form of a Tag, and that there is no record of the edit, as happens if you edit the content of someone's else's QA question ?
While the frequency of this type of insulting re-tagging has gone down, it still occurs. I would like to think the strong words I wrote to the one of the more frequent nugatory re-taggers last year contributed to this, but I'm not sure.
If we don't know who did the insulting re-tagging, then there's no certain way to report the person who did it.
How would you feel if you saw someone had tagged a question you posted with tags like "No Effort," or, "I am stupid" ... this actually occurred many times in the last year.
«I'm asked why doesn't C# implement feature X all the time. The answer's always the same: because no one ever designed, specified, implemented, tested, documented, shipped that feature. All six of those things are necessary to make a feature happen. They all cost huge amounts of time, effort and money.» Eric Lippert, Microsoft, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
Well Bill it was irony. I find the retagging of Q&A posts a bit trite and sometimes over the line. I think 'I am stupid' is inappropriate though I have not seen that myself. Most of the retagged questions disappear so others must agree to some extent. It is by no means the worst behaviour in the Q&A but I would not oppose the taggers becoming publicly known.
Peter Wasser
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell
|
|
|
|
|
pwasser wrote: it was irony
Sorry, "irony" you ain't got. Irony implies wit, and subtlety, and commentary which is context-sensitive.
Schadenfreude, sarcasm, inappropriate use of a forum for discussing serious matters: you got.
«I'm asked why doesn't C# implement feature X all the time. The answer's always the same: because no one ever designed, specified, implemented, tested, documented, shipped that feature. All six of those things are necessary to make a feature happen. They all cost huge amounts of time, effort and money.» Eric Lippert, Microsoft, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: Sorry, "irony" you ain't got.
No Bill irony you ain't got. Did you get out of the wrong side of bed this morning? I responded to your suggestion fully and with civility. You are now displaying the same hubris that the tagger you are railing against does.
Peter Wasser
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell
modified 16-Jan-15 20:18pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I would say that editing a question to re-tag was tracked and added to versions list before.
Maybe a change or collateral issue in latest time?
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 helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
It is edited by Sergey :link to revision[^]
It can be a point of discussion,but it should not be considered 'insulting'.
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad
|
|
|
|
|
It is edited by Sergey :link to revision[^]. Till now, versions were displayed when question is edited, but i think right now, theres bug i am not sure.
It can be a point of discussion,but it should not be considered 'insulting'.
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad
|
|
|
|
|
Don't if the calculation is correct but this[^] article got me wondering about the weight and removal of the votes.
Currently there's 51 votes and it's a high rank (4.91) article. However, it also has a lot of votes of one and from members with high voting weight. Even further 7 votes have been removed which matches the amount of votes of 1.
So the question is, should the criteria for removing votes take the member voting weight into account and perhaps not to remove the votes so eagerly?
|
|
|
|
|
This is a fairly common issue. A poor article, or one that contains some serious and fundamental flaws, gets lots of upvotes, probably by the author's friends. Is it any wonder we see so many bad samples in Q&A, when they actually try to implement the bad code? Considering the number of downvotes from people who know, including our great and glorious leader, this should have been removed from publication.
|
|
|
|
|
The funny thing is, it's still possible to vote to have an article removed because of poor quality yet very few people do that. I have just voted to have this article removed for this very reason, and I'm the first person to do so.
|
|
|
|
|
I can't see how to do that, apart from the Delete button. Good grief, my eyesight's worse than I thought. 
|
|
|
|
|
I suspect that's the issue (not your eyesight), but the fact that it's not prominent that you can do this. By the time you've reached the comments section, having suffered through the article, the flag has disappeared.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: I'm the first person to do so.
Only because he updated the article, which resets the counter. 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Copy-pasting my response to Chris :
Why was it deleted though? It looks like a decent article, lots of effort, screenshots, code samples and detailed explanation. 40,000 views since December. 2000 code-sample downloads and 50 bookmarks. Can't have been bad enough to have got deleted surely? 
|
|
|
|
|
It was deleted because it contains extremely dangerous code. Not the "hack your machine" type code but "Did they REALLY store passwords like that??" type code.
Never reinvent your authentication system if a better, more tested, more secure one is already available.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Mr. Chris Maunder,
I have few questions to you.
1) The Article was published one month before since that time it got only upvotes nearly 38 and i can say you that voters are not my friends.
2)The same article was been in CP Home page for more then a week under "Latest Best Picks".Even during that time that article never get any down vote.
3)Only after it was been selected for best article voting it got down vote.So i dont know the reason behind this as you know all the down voted members are visiting CP regularly.
4)Yesterday early morning there was sudden down vote nearly 7 by members with same msg as need Password Security and needs to use ASP.Net Authentication.
5) Even you(Mr. Chris) downvote with the same reason.I reply to your comment that iam working on that i will update my article soon.
6)Do you realy think is that realy hard job (I con't give example) for update the article with password Hashing and with ASP.Net Authentication.
7) As i had reply to your comment that i will update my article with more example.As you know i have published more than 17 articles,so you should consider to wait for a day.
8)For that whole day i work on it and added more example with more exlanation for Authentiacation and for the Password hashing.in the evening when i thought to update the article and publish ,I got the mail as your article has been closed .My whole day work was been wasted.
Now iam coming to your replay as you have mention that
.
"It was deleted because it contains extremely dangerous code. Not the "hack your machine" type code but "Did they REALLY store passwords like that??" type code.
Never reinvent your authentication system if a better, more tested, more secure one is already available."
.
As i have already mention that i had post a comment reply to you in that article that i will update my article with relevent example.If you have provided a chance for me to update it I would be more happily update that article but you didnt give the time.Perfection has no limitation Mr.Chris as you know last week Cp home page was redirected domain home page ,So the bug can be every where.
I think so the meaning of downvote is to improve the article and not to delete the article.
Whenever I plan to write a new article first i will deside what are all we are going to add which will be more useful for users.I will make a list and then Start writing.
Same like that as you know the Article Title says that it was mainly dealing with CRUD.
So i thought it was not necessary for beginers to start with password hashing .
But i accept that you and other members have downvoted for that and even for all i said the same reply that i will update with relevant example.
I accept Wrong is wrong who ever did that.But do you realy think so that it is good to delete that article.
Do you think that the author of that article has no capacity to update with relevant data.
Now iam sorry to say this Mr.Chris now iam deleting all my article from CP.As you know i have published many innovative articles as Nesteddatagridview,Windows Form Design at runtime and etc even today i have published one more Innovative article Link Here.
From yesterday i was been busy with working on publishing this article so i dont had time to view this conversation.But after i published my new article when i saw this conversation again i dont think that there is no use of presenting my articles,So iam deleting all.
Regarding the MVP ,if the certificate was not yet posted then kindly no need to post it.Iam not writing articles for MVP or for the prices.
But you know the author will be more happy only with the now of users viewing it and no of users getting benifit from that.In that way iam so happy that so far my articles has helped lot peoples and even you can see few of my articles like PLC Communication,Nutrunner Communication,Gage R&R ,SPC and etc with example program all that article you cont find any source code explanation from other aritcle not only from CP and also from other sites.
|
|
|
|
|
syed shanu wrote: Do you realy think is that realy hard job (I con't give example) for update the article with password Hashing and with ASP.Net Authentication.
No I don't, but your comment was "I will update the article". You gave no information on how you would update it.
This may seem like an arbitrary call by the CodeProject community but the point is that user management is so incredibly important that we cannot have authors promoting insecure solutions. Your very reputation made it imperative that the article be removed from publication.
It would have been a trivial matter for you to update your article after it was removed from publication with safe code and then have it resubmitted for moderation (it would have been accepted almost immediately). You still had the ability to update your article.
You've deleted and obliterated all your articles. I'm extremely disappointed in that. An article that was dangerous should be taken down immediately and corrected carefully (and not in a panic rush) and then re-presented to the community. Instead of accepting that your example needed work, and learning, you gave up and deleted everything.
That's not the attitude of someone who wants to teach, and teach well.
This is your choice. We're here if you wish to reconsider.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you Mr.Chris for your response.
You gave no information on how you would update it.
Author need's there own freedom to update their articles. The comment means that I will explain with proper example and explanation in my article. I'm not writing the article for first time and I can present my article with more good way.
The only thing I feel not good was you didn't give me time for updating my article.
I found some strange message posted with my ID in The Lounge. It seems like some one else posted with my CP ID.
I didn't post any message today in CP Lounge . But I don't understand how the message was posted with my CP ID, and in my email I'm getting response to that post.
Kindly check for this issue.
http://www.codeproject.com/Lounge.aspx?msg=4980770#xx4980770xx[^]
|
|
|
|
|
syed shanu wrote: Author need's there own freedom to update their articles
Absolutely. I'm not asking you to tell us step by step what you'll do. I was saying that you said "you'd update it" but that it didn't provide enough information / timeline for us to know whether you would update it today, tomorrow, or next week, and whether the updates would address the security issue.
Step back and think about this from the point of view of an information provider. It's far, far better to have an article offline for a day or a few days and then have it back with solid information than it is to just leave it up, knowing hundreds of people were viewing, and using, that code.
With regards to that message posted, my apologies! I was testing your account to ensure you had access to your articles and made a post while still testing your account. All fixed.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I accept what you mean Mr. Chris but still i did't get answer to my question.
1) The Article was published one month before since that time it got only upvotes nearly 38 and i can say you that voters are not my friends.
2)The same article was been in CP Home page for more then a week under "Latest Best Picks".Even during that time that article never get any down vote.
3)Only after it was been selected for best article voting it got down vote.So i don't know the reason behind this as you know all the down voted members are visiting CP regularly.
4)Day before early morning there was sudden down vote nearly 7 by members with same msg as need Password Security and needs to use ASP.Net Authentication.
I don't think that article is Extremely poor quality and Misleading to others.
You can read the article first i will start with question in that article as
How to create a Login page?
How to check valid user from Login and redirect to main page?
How to display Logged in user name in all pages?
How to bind data to Grid?
How to search data and display in Grid?
How to Insert/Select/Update and delete data from grid to database?
How to write N-Tire Application for Asp.Net or for Winform?
How to create a simple ASP.Net Web Application?
Here its clear that the article is mainly dealing with what, and what the readers can get benefit from this article.
For this article i don't think the Password security and ASP.NET Authentication is needed.
If i have added user management in that article then surely i will be explain about Password Hashing and ASP.NET Authentication.
As you can see that the goal of that article is not related to security or Authentication.
This article is tutorial based and it has clear view of what users can get benefit from that.
All the down vote was regarding Security and Authentication.I feel it was additional requirement needed to be added to that article so that the readers can get more detailed benefit.
The reason for deleting all my other article is Mainly due to You Mr.Chris . Because you are main responsible person to CP. You should treat and post message very carefully so that others dont get hurt in that.
Your message here in this conversations with other members.
However, the big guns brought out the really BFGs. The article is no more.
It seems like your intention is mainly focused on deleting that article rather then improving the article.Even during your downvote message you pointed as to delete the login section from that article and post like inventory management.
No I cont accept that because its good to find the solution rather then just deleting the issue part.
And i never ever give UP Mr. Chris.
|
|
|
|
|
syed shanu wrote: The Article was published one month before since that time it got only upvotes nearly 38 and i can say you that voters are not my friends
OK
syed shanu wrote: The same article was been in CP Home page for more then a week under "Latest Best Picks".Even during that time that article never get any down vote.
OK
syed shanu wrote: Day before early morning there was sudden down vote nearly 7 by members with same msg as need Password Security and needs to use ASP.Net Authentication
Yes there was. Troy Hunt, a very influential blogger and expert in authentication picked up on your article and slammed it. He, and his twitter followers, were very damning of your article. The community immediately took note of your article en masse and the down voting started.
syed shanu wrote: For this article i don't think the Password security and ASP.NET Authentication is needed
An excellent decision! Remove it and you have an article on CRUD. (I do have to ask, though: why do we need another article on CRUD? We have dozens and dozens and dozens)
syed shanu wrote: It seems like your intention is mainly focused on deleting that article rather then improving the article
My intention, as I have repeated multiple times, was to prevent dangerous code from being disseminated. You are an MVP. Your articles carry a lot of weight and the assumption that what you write is solid code.
syed shanu wrote: No I cont accept that because its good to find the solution rather then just deleting the issue part
You've completely ignored my point. The point I've made many times.
Your article contained dangerous information and you gave no indication of when or how your update would take place. You had access to your article at all times and you could have simply updated and republished it.
I was not willing to keep dangerous code lying around indefinitely.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Now i got my answer
Yes there was. Troy Hunt, a very influential blogger and expert in authentication picked up on your article and slammed it. He, and his twitter followers, were very damning of your article. The community immediately took note of your article en masse and the down voting started.
I will republish it Mr.Chris.For me it will be always happy to work with chalanging works.
Will update my article with in this week end ,Once article updatation dont i will send you the private mail you can check with that and mean time check with Troy Hunt.If you feel that updated article is good to publish you can send me back mail.Then i will publish it and all my other articles aswell.
|
|
|
|
|
Perfect.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
