|
I can't seem to post a comment to this[^] question - I just get "Oops! There seems to be a server problem, please try posting your comment later".
Text of comment:
I am sorry, but your question does not make a lot of sense. I realise that English is probably not your native language, but we need better information than you have given.
Jag är ledsen, men din fråga gör inte mycket vettigt. Jag inser att
Engelska är nog inte ditt modersmål, men vi behöver bättre information
än du har gett.
(hopefully that makes sense - Google translate English-Swedish.)
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together.
|
|
|
|
|
I think the question was deleted after you viewed it and before you commented on it.
We need to provide a better error message.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Possible, but I'm not sure - I seem to remember refreshing [F5] after the first few failed attempts. If it happens again, I'll try to pay more attention!
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together.
|
|
|
|
|
I looked into this more and it was a straight out server problem. These things happen, I'm afraid.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I was a little bored in the office today, so I was looking at the profiles of members who were leaving answers in the Q&A. Am I off my rocker(more than usual) that some guys are creating puppet accounts and up-voting their answers? I found a few who had multiple up-votes on 90+% of their answers. I'm all for seeing positive votes for good answers, but a ton of these answers were absolute crap, completely wrong, but highly voted.
Maybe I'm a little naive, but is an online reputation really that important?
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
Not only that but look at the bullshit comments to those questions and answers. Every time you comment you get a point added to your collection of points. So there are some people, high ranking people, posting bullshit comments...a slew of them at a time.
|
|
|
|
|
Good to know I'm not insane... Now if only I could figure out why it bugs me. 
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
PogoboyKramer wrote: Now if only I could figure out why it bugs me
I know why it bugs me...it's not right. At the same time, this place is just a forum, nothing more, nothing less. The points don't make the man, your contributions here do. And there are some "high-ranking" people here that don't contribute sh*t.
Just because you answer a question doesn't make you an authority and that is what some people do here. They come up with bogus answers that help out in no way at all and they rack up the points. Only your peers should be able to vote you as an authority..IMHO.
|
|
|
|
|
I'll have to start doing that. I really need the rep points.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: I'll have to start doing that. I really need the rep points.
You are now 3rd in the rep score table, just a 100 or so points behind John who's in 2nd place.
(via CP Vanity Lite[^]) 
|
|
|
|
|
yes, a shoot-out for second place is imminent.
BTW: what a shameless plug.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: BTW: what a shameless plug.
|
|
|
|
|
No, you don't need the rep points that's for sure. However, I do. So I think that useless drivel is on my agenda for the week ahead.
|
|
|
|
|
You're telling me! Only 180 enquirer points, 1 question asked in nearly eight years, if I was Chris I'd kick you off for your lack of contribution.
The Whiteboard - Surely the most remarkable invention ever?
|
|
|
|
|
Can you cite any examples for us?
.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 really don't want to drag any users under the bus if my hypothesis isn't correct, but I'll give a couple links as reference to why I'm asking?
This is what I would expect a normal profile to look like. He answers a good number of questions and gets votes on a small percentage of those answers as expected.
Suspicious is what I would refer to this member as. Even though there are a couple of 1 votes thrown in there, he has amazing karma to receive multiple votes on pretty much every answer he provides. This just doesn't seem plausible to me.
I didn't keep track of a couple others like this that I found yesterday, I had to dig again to find this guy.
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, he's just outright rude. I deleted a couple of his comments, but I don't have time to go through everything he's done.
.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's not the rudeness that I have issues with. I figure we're all adults and as such we're bound to run into people like that out there in life. I just found the up votes he gets on his posts and rather suspicious.
BTW. Thanks for taking the time.
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
I did it because his profile claims he's "always professional". When you tell someone to go f*ck themselves, I think that's a pretty wide step away from "professional". He's a putz.
.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 don't know. "Professional" athletes say that to each other all the time.
I'm in total agreement with you, BTW!
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
Here[^] is one more. All his answers are voted, though I think I have seen a couple of good answers from him before. But all answers voted high makes me curious. 
..Go Green..
|
|
|
|
|
This[^] chap.
Typical answer[^], I have deleted some but I'm getting bored.
Henry Minute
Do not read medical books! You could die of a misprint. - Mark Twain
Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?"
“I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.”
|
|
|
|
|
That's incredible - I don't think I've ever seen a negative Authorship score before
I guess his Authority is appropriate, though... 666
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together.
|
|
|
|
|
It seems the emssage is getting through to him reasonably clearly by looking at the scores on his answers.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I just approved an entry in Tips & Tricks as I felt (but others may not) that the author had followed the rules correctly. This reminded me of a rant in the Lounge a few weeks ago when someone took exception to an article being accepted and asked "who the *** accepted this?". Do others think that our names should be added to the page somewhere to indicate who accepted the article and when?
Just say 'NO' to evaluated arguments for diadic functions! Ash
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
