|
I downloaded Code128 barcode library.
Utterly wonderful - just perfect.
So pleased with it I created a membership to vote him 5 stars, and to point out that you CAN scan a barcode from the screen (with imaging scanners anyway), as the author said you could not. This little trick saves me a lot of paper.
Anyway
1 user id, steve@pinesoft.co.uk, Member 13705469.
Makes 1 vote (5 stars) and 1 post.
you then send me the following in an email:
Hi Member 13705469,
Your account at CodeProject has been reported as Content has been posted that is spam 10 times and is now deactivated.
Whether you liked the post (it was certainly meant to be informative - I don't normally bother typing messages, and it certainly wasn't meant as spam) or not is irrelevent. It was 1 message - no more no less.
You have a BIG bug in the works somewhere. I did not post 10 times, just the once.
So - something's wrong gents.....
Wonder if anyone can be bothered to find out what.
Kind regards, Steve
|
|
|
|
|
That message is pretty confusing actually; it actually means that 10 CodeProject members flagged your account as 'spammer', hence it got closed. It doesn't mean that you posted 10 spam messages. Surely it can be worded better though.
I am not an admin so I cannot check out what your message looked like or why it could be considered spam - we'll have to wait for a CodeProject administrator to find that out. If your message and your account was wrongly flagged as spam by the community, the admins can probably restore your account as well.
The quick brown ProgramFOX jumps right over the Lazy<Dog>.
|
|
|
|
|
I've reworded the email as "[Count] members have reported your account at CodeProject as "[Reason]". Unfortunately this means your account is now deactivated."
Is that clearer?
Your message was marked as spam because it came across as spam.
1. You mention your commercial product and include a link.
2. It's the first and only message you've posted.
3. You didn't provide a name
This is the behaviour many, many spammers undertake and whether you intended to spam or not this is how it appeared.
I've removed the link to your product and reinstated your account
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Chris - I hope the little scan from screen trick helps.
The Code 128 library is wonderful, and just what I needed.
|
|
|
|
|
For some reason the solution counter on the front page for question What's wrong with the code? is showing 0 all the time even though there has been an answer for a good time.
|
|
|
|
|
We had an issue last night where our event processing queue became blocked and a few events were lost, one of them being the event that would trigger the fact that a new answer had been posted to this question. It's up to date now.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
"This competition has ended", says the page. The rules say "ends on 4 March 2018 at 11:59:59 PM US Eastern Daylight Time". Right now it's 4 March, 6:44 AM EDT, which is long before 11:59 PM.
The homepage tells me when an article has entered the competition (like "Building a Recommendation Engine in C# entered in The Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence Challenge"), but it does not tell me this for the article Use Machine Learning to Determine the Programming Language of Text[^] by @sjb_strat (despite it being posted in the correct category). So the competition end time seems off overall.
The quick brown ProgramFOX jumps right over the Lazy<Dog>.
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas, thanks for bringing this up. I noticed that my article was not included as well - I wasn't sure if there may be been some latency in the system picking up the article - perhaps it runs at a scheduled interval. I definitely added the Use Machine Learning to Determine the Programming Language of Text article before the cutoff time.
I hope someone at CodeProject sees this and can have it addressed.
Thanks again for brining this up.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for bringing this up (my other reply is currently caught in spam review).
I definitely submitted before the cutoff time. Like you, I didn't see it get listed as part of the competition, but I thought that may just be a matter of timing - perhaps articles are picked up and identified as part of the competition at a certain interval.
My hope is that someone at CodeProject will see this and address the issue.
Thanks again for bringing this up.
|
|
|
|
|
It's up until the end of today. You're good to go. Sorry for the confusion.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title says it; in my settings I do have notifications and emails for article forum comments turned on, but I received neither.
The quick brown ProgramFOX jumps right over the Lazy<Dog>.
|
|
|
|
|
We were having some database issues that may have cause this.
It seems to have resolved itself, but we are investigating.
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana."
|
|
|
|
|
I got a notification for this message, so that seems like an improvement indeed 
The quick brown ProgramFOX jumps right over the Lazy<Dog>.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't find it bad, I am just curious if it really is on purpose.
I have edited a message of mine in the lounge from december, and then answered to someone in the thread.
The conversation now appears in the upper right corner of the home page as a new discussion, although it is in page 185 of the lounge.
Design or casuality? Desired or "something the hamsters better dig into"?
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.
|
|
|
|
|
The 'Discussions' area shows discussion activity. Whether that's a new or updated message. It's by design.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
OK
Thanks for answering
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.
|
|
|
|
|
This also applies to forums.
Maybe there should be a time limit on being able to answer a question. Say, 30 days or so. This will keep old questions from bubbling back up to the top of the queue.
An alternative is to continue to allow old questions to be answered, but restrict bubbling up to only include questions that are up to 30 days old. That way, the person that asked the question will still be able to get answers.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
I like the alternative.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I don't - it sounds like a great way to hide spam from the moderators.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: An alternative is to continue to allow old questions to be answered, but restrict bubbling up to only include questions that are up to 30 days old.
The down-side of that is that spammers will be able to post spam answers to old questions without anyone noticing.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Personally, I think if a question isn't answered within 30 days, it most likely never will be. I personally favor the lock and forget idea, but I wanted to present an alternative that could possibly deflect negative attention away from my actual desire to cut 'em off at the knees. 
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
I still prefer the idea I came up with a while back: if an answer is removed because of certain types of reports (mainly "spam" and "not an answer", but possibly others too), the question should go back to its previous position in the list, rather than jumping back to the top.
That way, we can still see and deal with the non-answers and spam posted to old questions, but the active list doesn't get cluttered up with threads that don't need attention.
Of course, it's easy enough to say that. I have no idea how complicated it would be to implement.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
HnApp[^]
This is an old version of the currently published article. I get the feeling it should't really be where it is.
Cheers,
Peter
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan's been testing. I've cleaned up aisle 7.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
