|
Well, the formatting is fixed 
Dalek Dave: There are many words that some find offensive, Homosexuality, Alcoholism, Religion, Visual Basic, Manchester United, Butter.
Pete o'Hanlon: If it wasn't insulting tools, I'd say you were dumber than a bag of spanners.
|
|
|
|
|
In this week's survey, what does the bar in the last line (the one with green background) stand for? Average overall-trust? There's no explanation and no value displayed.
"I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by." (DNA)
|
|
|
|
|
Just a graphical representation of the average score for that option
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Normally that line displays total votes and 100 % percentage (see the previous survey[^]). I think because this is multiple surveys in one surveys. its not displaying any value (I think its same in multiple choice surveys also).
|
|
|
|
|
There are lots of instances where enquirer, keeps on pressing 'Answer' button to ask more/further doubts instead of updating the question itself.
Wouldn't it be a good idea to not show Answer button/Disable Answer button to the user for his own question? He don't need to use answer button. Only case that would be debatable is 'what if he gets an answer meantime and want to reply it'... for such cases, he can update the question with the answer and mark it [Solved] in title or so.
For now, 99% enquirers ignore the warnings given by other users to not press answer button if it's not the case.
ADDED: This suggestion is for now (as it looks like a simple change and easy implementation)... for quick turnaround to the issue we are constantly facing right now. Once the forum sort of thing is implemented, this can be adjusted accordingly.
modified on Monday, March 29, 2010 11:27 AM
|
|
|
|
|
I agree. 90% of the people (or perhaps more) are actually not posting an answer when they click "add answer". They're posting more followup comments or adding more doubts to their original query. This makes the entire q&a section even more crappier (it's already a wasteland).
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
I think a ONE EDIT policy for Questions could be implemented.
Sometimes you post a question, then on reflection, realise you have missed something or have thought of something pertinent to the problem, so you edit.
This is fine, but further edits could be time blocked and carry no further points.
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
|
|
|
|
|
But this is about blocking enquirers to answer their own question.
How come...One Edit policy fit in here? Instead... multiple edits should be allowed in order to keep it updated based on the conversation. About points... editor points are already in discussion... i guess it was yesterday's thread.
In my suggestion, Points are secondary, making Q&A flow little smoother/cleaner and following some consistent process is more important.
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: I think a ONE EDIT policy for Questions could be implemented.
No. The queries can be edited any number of times, so that the OP can add more information if needed. They do not know they could do it, and that's why they post their follow up queries as "Answers".
Points are not important here. And I don't think anyone is going to be given any points for editing their own content to provide more clarifications on the query they posted.
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote: I don't think anyone is going to be given any points for editing their own content to provide more clarifications on the query they posted
They get 2 editor points - see the thread a couple below...
DaveIf this helped, please vote & accept answer!
Binging is like googling, it just feels dirtier. (Pete O'Hanlon)
BTW, in software, hope and pray is not a viable strategy. (Luc Pattyn)
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't know that, and I think it's inappropriate if that's how it works. If someone does edit their own post to a significant extent, then it might make some sense to give them points. But they're still editing their own query, and it's more beneficial to them than to others because they'll get better answers.
If someone edits the posts of other people to make it better, then that might be a different case.
Anyway, that's just my opinion.
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote: The queries can be edited any number of times
Now if the enquirer edits his question a number of times, and there is one person answering, editing his answer all the time, then we get a silly dialogue layout where the two sources are completely separate, instead of intertwined as chat boxes do. It is like having an interview, where the interviewer puts all his questions up front, and the interviewee puts all the answers below that.
The threaded layout, as used on the forums, is much more appropriate for such dialogues.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: The threaded layout, as used on the forums, is much more appropriate for such dialogues.
Which is one of the main reasons why I prefer the threaded style forums. Also, there's a forum beneath each such q&a page which people don't use. They instead go about posting "answers" to continue their discussion.
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, and we're working to fix that.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think we need a "respond to this answer" feature so an answer could actually be a mini-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
|
|
|
|
|
I think that is brilliant. Then if there are 2 or more people answering the question, the OP could communicate with both separately, and yet still have everything grouped under the original question.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree to what you say and i think something like that is already in queue.
I suggested for now, for a quick change, just disable the answer button for the user who asked the question. I believe that should be simple to implement for now. Once the mini-forum kind of thing comes up, this can be adjusted accordingly.
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: "respond to this answer"
Excellent wording! Maybe we can work that into our changes.
|
|
|
|
|
Wow! I hadn't been watching this for quite a while and I don't know if the changes took place overnight or was a progressive. Whatever may it be, it looks cool and very descriptive.
I think that the "Member no. XYZ" is unnecessarily displayed though. What's the use of it?
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote: I think that the "Member no. XYZ" is unnecessarily displayed though.
Most of the things are based on it! Its a Unique Id of CP members.
Changes are progressive...
|
|
|
|
|
Sandeep Mewara wrote: Its a Unique Id of CP members.
Thank you, but I knew that much.
But it is pointless to display my membership no right beneath my profile link. I was trying to find out what purpose it serves there, if any.
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote: But it is pointless to display my membership no right beneath my profile link. I was trying to find out what purpose it serves there, if any
Okay... lets take an example.. you want to run Luc's new article[^]... that is driven by Member Id. Now, if member Id's are not shown in profile pages, it would be really difficult to get what a member id is for a person and thus a problem!
|
|
|
|
|
I had been through Luc's article already. But the member id is displayed in the URL. My question was what is the problem that is posed if the member ID isn't displayed in the profile page, or what exactly is the purpose that it serves by sitting there?!
If someone wants to view my profile, why would they need to know my "member id"?!
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
