|
Dalek Dave wrote: Hey, your right!
This is the second time I'm noticing you having made this elementary grammatical mistake.
You are deemed inappropriate from this moment, to make fun of, or to correct, or even notice any grammatical mistakes on any post here, whatsoever.
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
Hmm. There is clearly an error there.
You posted a message congratulating New Zealand on beating Australia. The message did not self destruct, melt, or rearrange itself in amusing anagram instuling to the Kiwi captain.
(oh, and you can set your noise tolerance to define when messages change colours. See the FAQ[^])cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: You posted a message
I did not actually post that message - Sandeep Mewara did.
But, noise tolerance did fix the problem - now I finally know what that does. Pretty cool.Me, I'm dishonest. And a dishonest man you can always trust to be dishonest. Honestly. It's the honest ones you want to watch out for...
|
|
|
|
|
|
I had to insert some extra hard returns for this post[^] to look neat.
If I try editing the message, it looks ugly (with extra line breaks), but that's what look normal after it's been posted (and in the preview). I wonder where did the line breaks go...
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
This has been fixed.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Very good, thank you.
Lately, you should have been whipping the hamsters ruthlessly.
"Real men drive manual transmission" - Rajesh.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi everyone,
I’m sorry if it does not belong to this forum but I did not find another appropriate forum.
I do not understand how the membership status is gained. I have read the http://www.codeproject.com/script/Membership/Reputation.aspx but I still don’t understand.
Let’s say that according to the description “Member Reputation System” you have to have 5000 points as author or 1500 points as Editor or… to be gained as gold member. But when I go throughout the gold members, almost 50% of them do not fit the rule. Hmm… maybe I missed something. Thanks in advance for explanation.
Petr.
|
|
|
|
|
Currently we're displaying the wrong membership status - it's from the old system, not the new.
We're working to get this fixed so apologies for the confusion.cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for quick answer, Chris. Everything's clear now
|
|
|
|
|
|
How come the user is still active? If not deactivate, Isn't there a process of sending a 'warning' email to such users?
|
|
|
|
|
His account will probably be removed as soon as Chris is done feeding the hamsters
|
|
|
|
|
What is he feeding the hamsters to? ------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
|
|
|
|
|
I don't want to know so I never asked
|
|
|
|
|
Because CP's staff are on North American time and this was reported during the middle of the night. Once someone gets into the office a banhammer will be applied. 3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, the mess has been cleaned up. cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
This post made me think once again that the site's FAQ could be improved. First, there should be multiple FAQs, each dealing with a specific topic. Obviously, one of these topics should be "Monthly Competition".
Second, members should be allowed - and encouraged - to submit FAQs. They should be awarded article points for doing so. "FAQ" articles would have to be reviewed before being published.
|
|
|
|
|
So what if we made a page listing every Tip that is tagged "CodeProject FAQ"? Anyone and everyone could contribute. cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Anyone and everyone could contribute.
Having a page linking to all CP FAQs is OK. Allowing anyone to edit them is a bad idea IMO. CP FAQs should be authored by CP staff. You could consider editing privileges to a happy few non-staff. Although I would prefer a forum connected to the FAQ dispatch page, where you can receive, process and remove messages holding suggestions and comments.
|
|
|
|
|
I like the general idea, but think Luc's right about the need to limit editing rights. I wouldn't go quite as far as he does though. I'd limit applying the CP-FAQ tag to Gold+ members and staff; and editing to the same and the original author (regardless of status). 3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: So what if we made a page listing every Tip that is tagged "CodeProject FAQ"?
This sounds like a recipe for a mess. Again, how would you find FAQs for a specific topic? A Tag? How would you enforce the selection of a predefined set of Tags? And most important, how would a reader know that the FAQ was authoritative, and not just somebody's wet dream?
If each FAQ was like an article, then I think it would work. Members could post to the FAQ's forum - just like with articles - and you would get some valuable input on how members would like things to work.
|
|
|
|
|
I strongly feel that members should be able to update FAQs themselves, hence the Tip idea. However, I could create a series of articles ("Articles", "Membership", "Reputation" etc) that are editable by Gold level members (any flavour). Put these under a section "Site FAQs" in the General Reading chapter, sprinkle links around liberally and we're done? cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: I strongly feel that members should be able to update FAQs themselves,
If a member updates a FAQ so that the concept of, say - Monthly Competition - is totally perverted, how strongly would you feel about that? OK, forget about the perverted part, what if a member just has a wrong idea about something, and posts that wrong idea, and keeps posting it, until other members start posting it, too?
I think this is what Luc was getting at. Unlike other articles, the site FAQs are postings about stuff that is beyond members' control, and so must be reviewed for accuracy before being published.
[ Of course, I would love to post a FAQ about how a certain feature of the site works, and then have the site start working that way, but I don't think that's what you intended.]
|
|
|
|
|
Hans Dietrich wrote: OK, forget about the perverted part, what if a member just has a wrong idea about something, and posts that wrong idea, and keeps posting it, until other members start posting it, too?
That's already a possibility; someone asks a question in The Lounge, someone else responds with an answer that is clear, detailed, and wrong, answer gets up-voted, etc...
The advantage of the common wiki-style FAQ is that it can be corrected as easily as it can be corrupted, whether that corruption arises from malice, misunderstanding, or plain old neglect.
|
|
|
|
|
To paraphrase: The disadvantage of the common wiki-style FAQ is that it can be corrupted as easily as it can be corrected, whether that corruption arises from malice, misunderstanding, or plain old neglect.
When I look at a site FAQ, what I really, really want to know is, Is this the way it's supposed to work, or is this the way a majority of the members think it should work?
In the case of CP, only a very few people know for sure how certain site features are supposed to work. They are the ones who should be authoring / approving the FAQ contents, not some newbie Joe Blow.
|
|
|
|