|
Member 14678311 wrote: first part was concept which was referred from Microsoft doc
it was not referred, it was copied without any reference.
Member 14678311 wrote: this is lesson learnt for us and wrote a the same thing in mail to webmaster.
Then you have already done all what you could do, that is the email to webmaster and the thread here. Be patient and wait for their decission.
Member 14678311 wrote: give us one chance to rectify
we can't. We have some privileges, but still are only users. Only CP Staff can reinstaurate. But I don't think they will, as it has already been explained.
Member 14678311 wrote: continue to help this community. that is what our passion.
then create a new account and continue...
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Nelek wrote: then create a new account and continue...
I think it is a new account, and the same person is posting on behalf of their "room mate". 
As explained by OG and others, plagiarists get multiple warnings before an account is closed.
If that could not serve as a lesson, nothing else will. 
|
|
|
|
|
"My roommate" agrees with your investigation.
|
|
|
|
|
GKP1992 wrote: I think it is a new account, and the same person is posting on behalf of their "room mate".
So do I, but I still give the benefit of the doubt.
GKP1992 wrote: If that could not serve as a lesson, nothing else will.
That's exactly the reason why the accounts are not reanimated anymore. They don't learn. And that's exactly what I wanted to say with the "then create a new account" as answer to the "continue to help this community. that is what our passion." because I don't think the nuked account will live again.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
You seem to be doing an awful lot for your "roommate". What are the odds that you live alone in that room? 
Member 14678311 wrote: i feel code project should give one warning before deleting full record which people take years an years to do
The plagiarism prevention policy triumphs your feelings. In other words, it's far more important for this site not to host plagiarised content, rather than ensuring that you "feel good".
Besides, may be let your roommate talk for himself and explain why he was plagiarising to begin with, and then a site admin might take a look at it.
Also, "my friend" does not appreciate you hijacking this thread for your plagiarist friend. 
|
|
|
|
|
It seems fairly simple to me. If a member's account is voted out for being a spammer, then check for their valid posts to spam post ratio (check the votes). If the ratio seemed alarming, then take those posts down (at least hide it so it's not publicly displayed so it could be reinstated if necessary).
Some good checks to see if the member had just joined the site, say less than a month or so as spammers don't wait. If the member has published an article or has been answering questions, or have tips/tricks that are well received. There should be several factors that would indicate which direction to move in, and it is most certainly not as complicated as you're laying it out to be.
|
|
|
|
|
It does not seem complicated unless you are the one who has to set it up.
"Five fruits and vegetables a day? What a joke!
Personally, after the third watermelon, I'm full."
|
|
|
|
|
phil.o wrote: It does not seem complicated unless you are the one who has to set it up.
Yeah, I would happily set it up if I had access to the code. Do you have a point?
Geez, what's with people like you who come out here just to shoot down valid suggestions?! In case you did not know, this forum exists for that very purpose, so I would appreciate you leaving this out for someone who runs the site to respond.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sorry you take it like that, I did to mean to upset you.
My point is: when you have to setup a rule which will impact a website of this size, nothing is easy.
So, please, chill out a bit, I'm not your enemy 
"Five fruits and vegetables a day? What a joke!
Personally, after the third watermelon, I'm full."
|
|
|
|
|
phil.o wrote: My point is: when you have to setup a rule which will impact a website of this size, nothing is easy.
Also, the moon is really big. Both of which I call out as completely irrelevant here. The complexity in implementing a suggestion is firstly not for you to judge, and is secondly beyond the scope of this forum. This forum does not exist to only for members to suggest quick and easy fixes.
phil.o wrote: So, please, chill out a bit, I'm not your enemy
I am calm as I could possibly be without you needing to tell me, but that doesn't stop me from calling out people on their nonsense.
|
|
|
|
|
Whatever 
"Five fruits and vegetables a day? What a joke!
Personally, after the third watermelon, I'm full."
|
|
|
|
|
phil.o wrote: Whatever
That sums up your contribution to this thread pretty well.
|
|
|
|
|
You keep aggressing me for no obvious reason.
Please stop.
"Five fruits and vegetables a day? What a joke!
Personally, after the third watermelon, I'm full."
|
|
|
|
|
No. You were the one who tried to shoot down a genuine suggestion I made, and added a condescending "whatever" reply when called upon that. And now you think I'm the aggressor? And have the gall to tell me to stop, when you keep adding pointless replies?
You have the ability not to carry on this pointless discussion, but I see you're repeatedly choosing to respond, while telling me to stop. Your logic is makes absolutely no sense.
|
|
|
|
|
I never tried to shoot down anything; I just made a remark which was not against you nor you suggestion; when I stated I did not mean to offend you, you kept on harrassing me.
But you can be quiet; I leave this thread and your sunny personnality.
"Five fruits and vegetables a day? What a joke!
Personally, after the third watermelon, I'm full."
|
|
|
|
|
phil.o wrote: I never tried to shoot down anything; I just made a remark which was not against you nor you suggestion;
Your remark served absolutely no purpose there, which I thought was already made clear.
phil.o wrote: you kept on harrassing me.
Nonsense. You responded to every single post I made with passive-aggressive substance, including this one (which I'll respond to).
phil.o wrote: But you can be quiet
I have the abiliy to be quiet, yes. And so do you. Why are you stating that here though?
phil.o wrote: I leave this thread and your sunny personnality.
No announcement was necessary, as it's not that important for me to know. But I'd be glad not to deal with any more of your passive-aggressive tripe.
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: Maybe remove all messages if the account was opened in a specific timeframe? ... But that means adding special cases and I don't like those if I can avoid them.
LOL. Am I missing something here? I never asked you to do anything, my suggestion was for the site admins.
|
|
|
|
|
It's a can of worms
What if an account has been hacked? What if the user just had a brain fart and everyone jumped on him or her before they caught themselves?
On one hand it cleans things up quickly, on the other it's a fairly terminal resolution.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you Chris.
Possibly apply it only for those "under water" kind of reputation accounts, that are may be only a week old? Better yet just hide the messages away from public view, and if the member appeals then a human could take a look at it and take a decision. Of course, it could still be a can of worms though. Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
|
Suddenly it occurred to me that counting votes in our weekly polls instead of "voters" would help to avoid misunderstandings about the percentages. Probably it would be easier to interpret ... just a thought ... and this is an illustration how it could be done - the sum of percentage values at the centre is above 100, but weighting against all votes will keep the percentage at 100 ...
BR
modified 4-Dec-19 3:46am.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah - I thought of that many moons ago, but are those values, well, of value, given that multiple choices can be cast in some surveys.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Chris,
thank you for looking into this ...
About your point " ... but are those values, well, of value ... " I am not sure, either...
Being "exact-minded" I would be tempted to avoid "there is something
uncertain/unknown over here ..."-feeling caused by multicast poll results .
On the other hand, perhaps it is not that important as any poll is only somehow indicative
BR
|
|
|
|
|
Hello,
Shouldn't the spam post of a user be removed as well, or disable the links in the messages, after a user account has been removed?
|
|
|
|
|
Which account or message/article?
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana."
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
