|
Ah, thanks. I did mean something different; see the modified message. 
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts can be created freely and well in advance, so limiting on account age only would probably be ineffective and result in even more accounts.
I would limit voting based on reputation difference:
- people can upvote anything they like, upvoting here means adding a vote that equals or exceeds the current average;
- people can downvote anything they dislike provided their relevant reputation is at least equal to
<br />
100 + 0.3 * AR where AR is the relevant author's reputation. And downvoting here means adding a vote that is below the current average.
Examples:
- everyone can vote a 5 everywhere (a 5 will not lower the current average)
- everyone can vote a 4 on material that has an average vote of 2 or 3.5 or 4
- to vote a 2 on an article with a rating of 3.8 by an author with author rep = 1000 one needs author rep 400
- to vote a 1 on a programming forum message with a rating of 5 by an author with authority rep = 10,000 one needs authority rep 3,100
Extra idea: to add a vote (articles only, not messages) that differs by more than 1 from the average, a message is required. This should replace the "explain your 1 or 2 vote" rule.
>)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.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: - everyone can vote a 5 everywhere (a 5 will not lower the current average)
- everyone can vote a 4 on material that has an average vote of 2 or 3.5 or 4
That might lead to voting abuse the other way round. What if someone creates accounts to vote their own articles?! I know this is a very unlikely case with smaller probability, but the system should be ready to handle it. So, the user will need reputation to up-vote as well. Unfortunately this may prevent a genuinely newbie user from upvoting an article that was useful to him/her.
Some more thoughts are needed on this.
Luc Pattyn wrote: Extra idea: to add a vote (articles only, not messages) that differs by more than 1 from the average, a message is required. This should replace the "explain your 1 or 2 vote" rule.
Good idea!
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote: What if someone creates accounts to vote their own articles?!
No problem, people with reputation and insight will set that straight pretty soon.
One should only limit the really bad things, and the worst of all is a noob unrightfully downvoting the work and efforts of people who mean well.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Cleaned up cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
|
While reviewing many new posted articles, I notice a behavior appearing in the last months: Many lazy writers, may be trying to acquire visibility during their class courses or exams, post almost "null" articles, with attached some unexplained code, (sometimes just submit a code snippet as "article").
They have almost no chance to go published, but I noted the, many times, such "null articles" re-propose the article submission wizard default text with very small changes.
Essentially they treat such text not as a "suggestion about what to do" but as a form to be filled in. (And they fill it with the less as possible).
I wonder if -after the introduction of the article approving mechanism- such text is still necessary or if it is even better to let the wizard mostly empty.
Null articles can be -at that point- automatically discovered (they will have no structure).
It will also be nice if the messages posted as comment to low rates will not appear in the author's last posts list (since they have no relation with the "author" activity, but relates with "editing"). Sometime I lost, wile seeking a post of someone about a subject, in the middle of dozens of "My vote for 1", "My vote for 2" etc. which are irrelevant after they have been posted.
2 bugs found.
> recompile ...
65534 bugs found.
|
|
|
|
|
| Making it blank will solve one issue but introduce others. Personally I feel that provide guidance to the many outweighs the issues caused by the few. cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
you could disable the "make public" facility as long as any one of the boiler plate sentences (or relevant HTML source lines) is still in place; and provide an explicit message box while you're at it.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
| We already have checks for boiler plate code, but I've tightened them up even more cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Looking at the current points for an Article in the FAQ it is 100, and a tip/trick is 10.
Also the original rating system was 1- 4 Articles Bronze, 5-14 = Silver, 15-24 = Gold, 25+ = Platinum.
Under the new setup they are 50/1000/5000/10000 for B/S/G/P
This looks to me as if the 100 score for an article is too low, I would have though that a score of 250 would be more reasonable, and rewards more for the effort that can go into an article versus a tip/trick.
|
|
|
|
|
| The biggest contributor to points will be the voting you acrue on your contributions. Initial points for posting an article or a tip just set you up, and then over time the true value will be set by how members vote for your articles - and by which members vote for you. cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: and by which members vote for you.
that is new, at least it is not apparent from the FAQ which only mentions authority +5 or -2 (I did suggest weighing the votes some time ago). Do you care to elaborate it there?
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.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with Dave.
May be some points can (also) be given if article gets edited, what say?
As per new reputation for articles, looks like it's too high.
|
|
|
|
|
Article revision history:
version 1
Change at line 200 character 75 - added space
reason reputation spam
version 2
Change at line 200 character 75 - deleted space
reason reputation spam
version 3
Change at line 200 character 75 - added space
reason reputation spam
version 4
Change at line 200 character 75 - deleted space
reason reputation spam
version 5
Change at line 200 character 75 - added space
reason reputation spam
version 6
Change at line 200 character 75 - deleted space
reason reputation spam
version 7
Change at line 200 character 75 - added space
reason reputation spam
version 8
Change at line 200 character 75 - deleted space
reason reputation spam
version 9
Change at line 200 character 75 - added space
reason reputation spam
version 10
Change at line 200 character 75 - deleted space
reason reputation spam
...3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|
|
Looks like that bot you made is working fine!
|
|
|
|
|
Looks like you need at least 25 articles and 10,000 author reputation points to become a platinum...
Maybe the reputation categories on the left side (Author, Debator, and Authority) indicate membership levels.
I think the Debator membership levels should be the same as the other two.
Maybe in order to get platinum, you should be platinum in those three categories 9and have 25 articles).
I think membership level needs to be defined according to the new reputation system..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
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: I think membership level needs to be defined according to the new reputation system
That's currently underway.cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Is there any indicator that shows the question was resolved with some answer?
I do find a different bordered box for some answers at time, does that mean resolved?
Can there be any indicator to show the answer was accepted without opening the question?
Also, can there be a way (may be email) to inform the acceptance of his/her answer?
|
|
|
|
|
| Green means an accepted answer. There's a tooltip on the answer count indicator box, but clearly that's not very obvious cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
If i login into CP and try to look at my Question & Answer section (My Posts), i dont find any indicator telling me which answers were marked as accepted. No green color or no tooltip anything.
Is this known?
In future, will there be something to have an easy lookup at the questions that has an accepted answer given by self? Probably in 'My Posts -> Answers' tab?
|
|
|
|
|
There's a green check mark next to those answers marked as accepted.
|
|
|
|
|
As Chris already told, answer box is green when accepted answer. But that is only when you go and have a look at all the questions.
Quick Answers -> View all Question workflow.
My issue is while I am logged in and I go ahead and look 'my question and answers' (from my profile page)
Click on answers tab. (Now i see only those questions that i had answered to). I want to know which were the questions that had 'accepted answer'. Further was my answer accepted?
In this scenario, there is no color-coding. (thus no green) no tooltip. No way to know which were the questions that had answer accpeted that i had answered.
Hope it was more clear this time.
|
|
|
|
|
Look again. There is a green checkmark to the right of your accepted answers..
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
