|
The Grand Negus wrote: Toxcct campaigning for his articles;
you perfect moron. My articles are on CodeProject... What the hell is the problem with you bastard ???? 
|
|
|
|
|
toxcct wrote: you perfect moron. My articles are on CodeProject...
And great articles they are 
toxcct wrote: What the hell is the problem with you bastard ????
He's probably chapped that his Plain English articles were removed some time ago when he started his trolling crap 
|
|
|
|
|
PaulC1972 wrote: A big no-no. You'll get flamed big time.
I've never seen anyone flamed for an advert in a signature.
I advertise events in mine all the time. Some of them I'm personally involved in putting the event together. Others are events that the other core members of Scottish Developers are arranging.
|
|
|
|
|
Colin Angus Mackay wrote:
I advertise events in mine all the time. Some of them I'm personally involved in putting the event together. Others are events that the other core members of Scottish Developers are arranging.
I think those are really cool. I do check them out. If I had the time and money to come to Scotland, I'd definitely attend  On second thought, my dad-in-law is wanting the family to take a trip to Scotland with him. I think summer 2008 or 2009 
|
|
|
|
|
Many people put a simple link to their web site in their signatures. If you keep it simple and unobtrusive, and the main reason for your post is something other than promoting your product I personally do not have a problem with it. Just look at some of the signatures that are used around the site such as this one[^].
You may be right
I may be crazy
-- Billy Joel --
Within you lies the power for good, use it!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Well, so far the answer is very unclear. I've got PaulC1972 telling me it's "a big no-no" and you saying that you "do not have a problem with it".
I think we need a definitive reply from the powers that be.
|
|
|
|
|
The Grand Negus wrote: so far the answer is very unclear. I've got PaulC1972 telling me it's "a big no-no" and you saying that you "do not have a problem with it".
Go ahead and try. I would like to make the suggestion of using some creativity (my sigs could probably use a little more zip :-> ). I don't know what the general response from members is going to be. I'd stay conservative on what is in the sig. Try like Mr. Duncan's and others
|
|
|
|
|
Yep. I used to advertise the Latex Appendage Suit (tm) in my sig, and nobody said anything about it (other than to request pictures of the apparel).
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: request pictures of the apparel
No harm there. Not like you advertise it to being the only solution like how the Plain English Compiler is rammed down people's throats in the old Osmosian posts.
|
|
|
|
|
It's an inside joke for long-time CP members.
I never advertised it, but it was the topic of several discussions.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: It's an inside joke for long-time CP members.
I never advertised it, but it was the topic of several discussions.
Thanks for clearing me up on that. Now I know
|
|
|
|
|
Including a link to your product or service in your sig is fine as long as it doesn't make your posts blatant ads for your product.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Including a link to your product or service in your sig is fine as long as it doesn't make your posts blatant ads for your product.
Thanks, Chris. I was trying to say that I guess if the posts are blatant then the flaming begins
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Including a link to your product or service in your sig is fine as long as it doesn't make your posts blatant ads for your product.
Case in point. A guy complains in the Lounge that he just spent several hours installing Visual Studio and associated components, fixes, etc. I express my opinion: "That seems unreasonable to me - development systems should be small, efficient, and easy to install." This remark is followed by a link (in my signature) to an exemplary development system that is small, efficient, and easy to install.
Is that a blatant ad?
|
|
|
|
|
Using replies as opportunities to talk about your own product when the original reply had nothing whatsoever to do with your product is simply self-promotion.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Using replies as opportunities to talk about your own product when the original reply had nothing whatsoever to do with your product is simply self-promotion.
Would also start a flame war. This would disrupt the peace and harmony in the forums
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Using replies as opportunities to talk about your own product when the original reply had nothing whatsoever to do with your product is simply self-promotion.
But it's not myself that I'm promoting, or even this particular product. It's ideas that we're promoting. Like the idea that development systems shouldn't require hours of installation, or the idea that websites shouldn't be so cluttered that people find it difficult to locate the "discuss" button. Or the idea that hierarchical forums create as many problems as they solve (weirdness included). I've got a million of 'em. And yes, our products are examples of how things might be done instead, but even if I didn't have a product, those would still be my opinions. The product simply adds credibility to those opinions, and makes them "constructive criticism" instead of just "criticism".
Are you saying I shouldn't express my opinions here because we've taken the time to develop an example application that embodies those opinions? There's so much of me and my philosophy in the Plain English IDE that it would really be hard to say anything without at least an implicit reference to that tangible manifestation of my beliefs. Should I just express the opinions and leave the signature off? What do you recommend?
|
|
|
|
|
Then please discuss your ideas and not your product
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Then please discuss your ideas and not your product
By which you mean: "Then please discuss your ideas and not your product which is the prime example of how those ideas manifest themselves in real life." Like, "Talk all you want about trees, but don't mention oaks, maples, or pines." Seems a bit restrictive, don't you think?
Here's what happens now:
(1) I say, "It doesn't have to be like this."
(2) Someone replies, "How should it be?".
(3) I answer with the product.
Here's what happens under your suggestion:
(1) I say, "It doesn't have to be like this."
(2) Someone replies, "How should it be?".
(3) I answer, "I'm not allowed to say."
Nonsense.
|
|
|
|
|
No, actually what has been happening is
1) Someone says: I have a problem with X, or Y is dumb
2) You reply: You should check out our Product at our website or email me at this address.
You have a product and that's great. You're passionate about it, which is even cooler. But you think it's the only solution for the problems you perceive and it's not. It's an option.
The problem with your posts isn't so much the advertising of your product. It's your approach of saying "You should use our product" everywhere, constantly, out of context and counter to what the original poster has originally asked.
Please just step back a little and consider what it would be like if we had a Java zealot, or a Fortran Fanatic doing exactly what you are doing.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: But you think it's the only solution for the problems you perceive
Not so. Categorically, not so. But I do think the only solution for overcomplexity is simplification; the only solution to inefficiency is efficiency; the only solution to bad design is good design. Our product just happens to be the best example I have to offer. Point me to something better, and I'll promote that (the same way I've promoted DarkBasic and Oberon here in the past).
Chris Maunder wrote: It's your approach of saying "You should use our product" everywhere, constantly, out of context and counter to what the original poster has originally asked.
But look closely and you'll see that that is not what I say. I say (1) you folks should object, strongly, to violations of simplicity, efficienty, and bad design; and (2) you folks should do something about them. Stick your heads out the window and cry, "We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore". Refuse to "upgrade" to Vista, for example (which is of no direct concern to us - our products use so little of the operating system, and look the same on all versions, so we don't really care - but giving Microsoft more money and more control is a problem that affects us all).
And who are you to talk? You're whole site literally screams "Use Microsoft and nothing else!"
Chris Maunder wrote: Please just step back a little and consider what it would be like if we had a Java zealot, or a Fortran Fanatic doing exactly what you are doing.
It would be an improvement. Really. Competition can be a good thing, and in this case, it would be. I've seen a variety of posts here asking for the deprecated Java forum, or a Delphi forum, or more information about Linux. One of your own surveys had almost 30% of the respondees working daily in Delphi, and yet you offer them nothing - not even a tiny forum in a corner. The site is in danger of becoming nothing but a bunch of "inbred" Microsoft drones (apologies to Red).
The stature and influence that God has given you with CodeProject, Chris, comes with responsibility. Be careful what you do with it.
|
|
|
|
|
The Grand Negus wrote: The site is in danger of becoming nothing but a bunch of "inbred" Microsoft drones
I can't see that happening. Take me as an example: Sure I use .NET, I work for a Microsoft Gold Partner, in work I've ditched NUnit, NCover, etc. for the tools built in to Visual Studio Team System.
However, I still use NUnit (out of work), Rhino mocks (because MS don't have a mock framework solution), SQLite, FireFox, I intermittently try out a Linux distro, I arrange developer events and some of them are not even MS oriented (Scottish Developers have had speakers from the Oracle and Java communities and a lot of the agile stuff is happening in Java)
A lot of people here work mainly with MS products - but not exclusively because they have to interact with non-MS products. That adds richness and diversity. It also means that we won't end up with the kind of constant zealotry found on Slashdot.
|
|
|
|
|
Colin Angus Mackay wrote: because they have to interact with non-MS products.
But not for long, if Microsoft gets its way. And deprecating the Java forum here is one more step toward granting Microsoft its wish. Take enough little steps and suddenly you're there.
Colin Angus Mackay wrote: That adds richness and diversity.
Wouldn't a couple of Fortran Fanatics do the same thing? Perhaps even a Plain English proponent or two...
|
|
|
|
|
The Grand Negus wrote: Fortran
Now that is a language I haven't programmed in for a very long time
|
|
|
|
|
The Grand Negus wrote: Wouldn't a couple of Fortran Fanatics do the same thing? Perhaps even a Plain English proponent or two...
What we need is a Magik zealot - It was a wonderful language. It had in 1988 things the are only just about to arrive in CLR 3.0! It was written by a post-doctoral graduate from Cambridge University called Arthur. The only other person in the entire world that could actually understand this guy was his girlfriend and the then CEO of a company called Smallworld. They managed to dumb down his ideas so it could be explained to the world.
Wonderful language - we should make it mandatory. I'm actually leanring how to make a compiler to the CLR so that we can have Magik .NET (Actually, no it was for other reasons, but a Majik.NET would be also be cool).
One of the coolest things about Magik was that it didn't have Boolean logic. The result of an expression could be true, false or maybe. (It also had the extreme case where the result could be "no_way" where not "no_way" would also be "no_way") Absolute genius!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
