|
Thanks - fixed
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Well I just found this ghost user
Round Button in C#[^]
TVMU^P[[IGIOQHG^JSH`A#@`RFJ\c^JPL>;"[,*/|+&WLEZGc`AFXc!L
%^]*IRXD#@GKCQ`R\^SF_WcHbORY87֦ʻ6ϣN8ȤBcRAV\Z^&SU~%CSWQ@#2
W_AD`EPABIKRDFVS)EVLQK)JKQUFK[M`UKs*$GwU#QDXBER@CBN%
R0~53%eYrd8mt^7Z6]iTF+(EWfJ9zaK-iTV.C\y<pjxsg-b$f4ia> -----------------------------------------------
128 bit encrypted signature, crack if you can
|
|
|
|
|
A loophole that was fixed.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Image Button and Simulate Windows Media Player UI[^]
It shows '5 votes for this article.' but in chart it shows only 4 votes( 25% each )
TVMU^P[[IGIOQHG^JSH`A#@`RFJ\c^JPL>;"[,*/|+&WLEZGc`AFXc!L
%^]*IRXD#@GKCQ`R\^SF_WcHbORY87֦ʻ6ϣN8ȤBcRAV\Z^&SU~%CSWQ@#2
W_AD`EPABIKRDFVS)EVLQK)JKQUFK[M`UKs*$GwU#QDXBER@CBN%
R0~53%eYrd8mt^7Z6]iTF+(EWfJ9zaK-iTV.C\y<pjxsg-b$f4ia> -----------------------------------------------
128 bit encrypted signature, crack if you can
|
|
|
|
|
Thiru and Chris will be pleased that they got this bug on an article with a low number of votes. With just 4-5 votes, debugging this should be easy. I expect a fix by noon today. What with VS 2010's superior productivity and all that 
|
|
|
|
|
all of us adding lots of votes could make the problem disappear too. 
|
|
|
|
|
Possibly a result of us not having stored full voting data from the very beginning of voting.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
the article is posted May 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
One of my articles has a similar issue. There are 2 votes (3 and 5) which results in an average of 3.67 instead of 4.0.
|
|
|
|
|
That is an entirely different matter, and not a bug; votes get weighted by the reputation color of the voter (it is explained in a FAQ somewhere); if the 3-vote has twice the weight of the 5-vote, the average would be (3+3+5)/(1+1+1) = 3.67
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for that explanation. It leads me to a concern I have about this site's strictly numerical rating system. I would prefer to have a rating system that required that lower ratings be explained. The intent of this site, I believe, is to help us all improve. Rating an article with a 1, 2 or 3 without an explanation does nothing toward that end. Especially, as you pointed out, when some votes have more weight than others. It would be great, therefore, if, when a person entered a rating of 1, 2 or 3 for an article the voter is identified and they are required to provide an explanation for the low vote. Not only would this, in my opinion, improve the quality of the rating feedback, it would maybe make someone who tends to rate very low stop and think before heedlessly trashing someone's work.
Providing visibility to the author of the weight being given each vote would also be a help.
|
|
|
|
|
Right now you need to explain 1- and 2-votes on articles, i.e. as soon as one votes low, a textbox needs getting filled explaining oneself; and like you I think that is very good (although one could just enter "got you").
The forced feedback got introduced to call a halt to people who down-voted randomly; some of those seem to vote 3 now, as that does not require any additional action.
I have suggested to expand this to all article votes. If I read the article, I vote and provide feedback. Always, good or bad. Chris is not inclined to do this.
FWIW: On forum messages, you can, but don't have to explain a vote; as those messages are less important, more short-lived, I think that decision is quite OK.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: Chris is not inclined to do this
Incorrect. I've implemented this and it's currently in beta.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Great. It is a great pleasure being corrected like that.
I had suggested that a couple of times, and as you never really reacted on that part of my messages, I had almost given up all hope.
I suggest once more you move the voting tool from the article page to the edit message page then (so we get a large edit box when up/down voting), and change the widget from "New Message" to perhaps "Add a comment or question, and vote".
BTW: especially when no messages are present yet, the forum (or the possibility to add questions) is not noticed eaisly by newcomers. You might change the layout a bit, maybe use a real (and bigger) button rather the current widget, and maybe have a duplicate close to or in the header.
|
|
|
|
|
Let me clarify: For 1-3 votes you must provide a comment. for 4-5 votes you may provide a comment.
As a user of my own system it would annoy me no end if I had to go into the message posting page to vote. The two are related only conceptually, not practically. I often read an article and just want to give it a thumb's up. I do not want to go into a song and dance about it. Burying the voting inside the message box needlessly complicates things. Everyone is familar with an Ajax driven thumbs up/down or 1-5 rating bar. Not many see a "vote and comment" button housed in a separate room.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
OK, I'm a lot less cheerful already, but it still is a (small) step in the right direction. 
BTW: It also means "I have suggested to expand this to all article votes... Chris is not inclined to do this." was in fact correct.
Chris Maunder wrote: just want to give it a thumb's up
Can be solved like this: do show a voting bar; for most people it would act the same as the "add ... and vote" button, however sufficiently reputed people could use it to vote immediately.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Think about it - not really. I don't have a static IP at home, it is dynamically assigned by my ISP. IP Address blocking could stop me looking at CP, but not even inconvenience him. After all, if your IP is non-static, then unplug the phone line, count to ten and plug it back in isn't a major price to pay for cheap / free adverts...
Did you know:
That by counting the rings on a tree trunk, you can tell how many other trees it has slept with.
|
|
|
|
|
In this page:
http://www.codeproject.com/info/Submit.aspx[^], have a look at the typo in bold:
Foreign language submissions
The Code Project is an English-language site. While we welcome those from all cultures and all walks of life, we do ask that only English language articles be psoted.
About following words in bold:
Submitting an article based on another person's work
It is OK to use others code as a base......
If you are submitting a modification, extension or correction to another persons work then we ask that...
I think in both cases an apostrophe is needed.
Best regards,
Jaime.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fvie fro taht!
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
|
|
|
|
|
Yes - I already psoted that some time ago...
|
|
|
|
|
Appears to be nobody cares, because typo is still there.
Best regards,
Jaime.
|
|
|
|
|
No, we care a lot.
But we care more about fully testing our next release in which this typo fix is included.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
This Tosser[^] needs ejection!
Look at his posts.
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
