|
On my most recently posted article, I can't seem to get a count for the 3 and 4 votes. If I hover the mouse cursor over the sliver of bar that represents these values, all it says is "Voting Distribution. Recent Data Only". When the bars are very short like that, I've never been able to get the site to give me the actual values.
The article in question is here:
Multithreading, Delegates, and Custom Events[^]
Is there any way to improve that? Hovering over the graph shows all number of the votes at once maybe, like so?
5 - 21 votes
4 - 1 votes
3 - 2 votes
2 - 0 votes
1 - 0 votes
On a side note...
It still annoys me that people vote low on an article without leaving a reason as to why. Granted, the cited article doesn't have any 1's or 2's, but I think that's only because the voter is identified, and they're forced to leave a comment (which can then be disputed). I can only improve/defend the article if someone leaves a comment, but since the user(s) aren't leaving a comment, I can only deduce that they're being as malicious as they can be without being identified and for reasons that aren't related to the article itself.
I know there's really nothing anyone can do about it, and a 3 is certainly better than a 1 or 2, but it sure would be nice if these people acted just a little more mature when voting articles..45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"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." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
You have two 4s and one 3 (with a little effort you can get the tooltip to show). You can also use IE's built-in zoom to make the graph larger and thus easier to hover over. And yeah 3 is the new 1 
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I'm using FireFox. I wonder if FireFox has a zoom feature....45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"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." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
| It does. Ctrl +/-/0 3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|
|
as well as Control/MouseWheel (if you have one) or Control/Trackpad_drag when your trackpad emulates a mouse wheel.
FYI: FireFox also has a View/Zoom menu staring at you in disbelief.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
I only read code that is properly formatted, adding PRE tags is the easiest way to obtain that. All Toronto weekends should be extremely wet until we get it automated in regular forums, not just QA.
|
|
|
|
|
The awesomeness of your 5 column is overshadowing the other, less important data.
I guess I could put the tooltip over the entire column, not just the bar image.cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: The awesomeness of your 5 column is overshadowing the other, less important data.
I hadn't looked at it like that, ut yeah - you're right.
Chris Maunder wrote: I guess I could put the tooltip over the entire column, not just the bar image.
That would be nice. I found that if I zoom in half a dozen steps with FireFox, it gives me the correct info, but having to zoom in is kind of annoying..45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"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." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
there are many ways to solve that; maybe you should switch to a logarithmic scale? (not really, zero would become a problem then). Making the graph twice as high would improve but not solve things.
I suggest you merge all six tooltips into one:
Voting distribution, recent data only.
21 people ( 96.2%) voted 5
2 people ( 0.4%) voted 4
etc
It will look best when using a non-proportional font!
As to the 3- and 4-votes without comment, my suggestion (for articles only) is to not have vote buttons on the article page at all (just a "vote now" button which acts like the "add message" button), only have them on the message edit page, i.e. always require a message; if people took the time to really look at the article and want to vote, they will be willing to express their thoughts, even for a 5.
Imagine John's article with hundreds of positive comments over time...
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
I only read code that is properly formatted, adding PRE tags is the easiest way to obtain that. All Toronto weekends should be extremely wet until we get it automated in regular forums, not just QA.
modified on Thursday, February 11, 2010 2:36 PM
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: Imagine John's article with hundreds of positive comments over time...
The mind boggles...
Of course, an alternative is to only allow 5's to be voted on my articles. That would solve the issue completely.
My original (serious) suggestion was to allow provide just one button - "Mark as Useful". This way, people could either mark it useful, or not mark it at all, and an article's worth would be determined by how many people thought it was useful. This would then completely nullify the effect of the univoting retards and would keep me from complaining about them.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"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." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
I would not favor an asymmetric voting system. Getting many "useful" marks might indicate either an excellent article on a rather specialized topic, or a mediocre article on a very popular subject.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
I only read code that is properly formatted, adding PRE tags is the easiest way to obtain that. All Toronto weekends should be extremely wet until we get it automated in regular forums, not just QA.
|
|
|
|
|
The only danger would be that articles aren't voted because nobody has used the code or technique..45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"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." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
Nope. Having a symmetric voting scheme results in an average value giving the aggregate opinion of all who decided to vote, whether high or low, and independent of the popularity of the subject. One article having an average score of 4.5 tells me it is liked more than another article averaging at 3.3; even when the former is voted 1000 times and the latter 10 times, or the other way around. An asymmetric scheme can't provide the same kind of information.
That is one of the reasons I continue to defend the 1-to-5 voting scale for everything on CP, while bashing the good/bad question and good/bad answer stuff (which is still in place although Chris admitted was not working as hoped).
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
I only read code that is properly formatted, adding PRE tags is the easiest way to obtain that. All Toronto weekends should be extremely wet until we get it automated in regular forums, not just QA.
|
|
|
|
|
Yesterday I accidentally unchecked the "Use HTML in this post" check box in the posting form. Now every new post I make has this unchecked. Anyway to reset that so it's checked by default?
|
|
|
|
|
For message forums, your "settings/forum" tab should hold the defaults for the 4 checkboxes.
Not sure whether the "Interpret HTML..." one that exists for QA and TT is merged with the forum one.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
I only read code that is properly formatted, adding PRE tags is the easiest way to obtain that. All Toronto weekends should be extremely wet until we get it automated in regular forums, not just QA.
|
|
|
|
|
... But not in Chinese this time around 
Clicking various links around the site (for instance the "New post" button in this 'ere forum) result in a "401 - Unauthorized: Access denied due to invalid credentials. Please go take a long walk off a short pier/get bent/all your base..." or something similar.
Evidence[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Just reconfiguring a server and it's kicking up a storm.
One of the guys just headed out back to get the large, electrified prods so that should fix things.cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
| Web Dev forum isn't rendering the way it should. Here[^] is an image that shows how it looks in FF 3.6. "No matter how many fish in the sea; it will be so empty without me." - From song "Without me" by Eminem
|
|
|
|
|
| Fixed cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
| That was quick. Thanks. "No matter how many fish in the sea; it will be so empty without me." - From song "Without me" by Eminem
|
|
|
|
|
when going to this[^] user's profile it says: 1 article
but when clicking on it I get this[^]
Kind of confusing as well since the "title" says 0 articles found
and underneath it says "Article: 1"
So something is going wrong there
(haven't seen it anywhere else tho, but didn't test on that many users)
|
|
|
|
|
| Thanks - we'll check out what's happening cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I see it's fixed
Yet there is something else strange going on (or not don't really know)
The same user's reputation states 'Author -5'
After reading the FAQ it seems this is possible when a article / tip trick / blog is down-voted but this user hasn't posted any article's / tip trick / blog.
Maybe the reputation hasn't caught up yet or something, just thought I'd point it out
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe the correct way to jerk a knot in these people is to have a stepped retribution system.
Strike 1
- Account is suspended for 7 days.
- The user cannot post/vote (or otherwise participate) in the site beyond reading the content
- User account status is set to bronze
- A 90-day probation before he can gain status above bronze
- The user's icon is overlaid with a dark gray "/" in a dark gray circle to indicate he's suspended
- The user's icon is overlaid with a dark gray "/" without the dark gray circle to indicate he's on probation
Strike 2
- Account is suspended for 30 days.
- The user cannot post/vote (or otherwise participate) in the site beyond reading the content
- All current messages marked as not replyable
- Reputation set to 0
- User account status set to whatever is below bronze.
- A 90-day probation before he can gain status to bronze.
- The user's icon is overlaid with a dark red "/" in a dark red circle to indicate he's suspended
- The user's icon is overlaid with a dark red "/" without the dark red circle to indicate he's on probation
Strike 3
- User account is banned
- His/her user icon is changed to a red "Bob" profile superimposed with a black "/" with a black circle.
In the event of a Strike 1 or Strike 2, the user is emailed with instructions to respond to the notice or be immediately banned.
-----------
I know - this is a lot of work for a relatively small problem, but the current crop of retards is decimating the C# forum..45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"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." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
| You've heard of Occam's razor, but much prefer a turbo charged Braun 8995 with all the extra attachments. cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"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." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
