|
I know it is annoying to receive private email. I've received handful of them. Any private email I received gets automatically deleted and I don't even bother to answer it.
What drives me nuts is, when the OP sending private email asking for help or clarification. Well, How in the world is other people going to learn from that private email. Put it on the forum so either me or others will answer it, and also, others will learn from the experience. 
p.s. Chris's ides is excellent. Can't wait to see it.
|
|
|
|
|
My sentiments exactly.
Yusuf wrote: Put it on the forum so either me or others will answer it, and also, others will learn from the experience.
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.”
|
|
|
|
|
What drive ME nuts is completely unrelated questions sent from a completely unrelated message in the forum for an completely unrelated article.
|
|
|
|
|
CP Team,
I just observed whilst posting the Voting Reason for this article (dotNET Assembly members browser[^]) that the Voting Reason itself appears as Article Comments.
I would suggest the reason should be only emailed to the CP Editorial Team unless and otherwise, the poster itself feels okay to share it as a comment on the article. You may put a checkpox in the rating reason form towards this cause.
I would suggest the following reason towards my stand: CP MVPs or other elite members (like Site Supports/Admin etc) might be finding historic reasons (from the past (mis)demeanour of the article author) of similar misuse/abuse by a particular member and may be submitting this as part of the report to the Editorial Team. Sharing this across to the author (or the world for that reason) would not be a recommended way, for security reasons.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep!
|
|
|
|
|
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar wrote: I would suggest the reason should be only emailed to the CP Editorial Team
The reason this was done is to control the drive-by 1-votes. I believe it has been very effective in doing this, and I would not like to see it changed.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar wrote: I would suggest the following reason towards my stand: CP MVPs or other elite members (like Site Supports/Admin etc) might be finding historic reasons (from the past (mis)demeanour of the article author) of similar misuse/abuse by a particular member and may be submitting this as part of the report to the Editorial Team. Sharing this across to the author (or the world for that reason) would not be a recommended way, for security reasons.
You always have the choice of sending a private email to Chris et al. Going back to anonymous 1- and 2-votes would be a very bad thing.
[update] I did not vote your post 1, and I urge anyone who agrees or disagrees to state their reasons, so that at least this one forum will be free from anonymous voting.
modified on Thursday, April 30, 2009 8:36 AM
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for clarifying, Hans. But the only concern for raising this was the latter points.
Hans Dietrich wrote: at least this one forum will be free from anonymous voting
I support your views. In fact, Chris & co. are aggressively working towards stopping the univoter menace and are bringing out a lot of measures towards that too.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep!
|
|
|
|
|
My opinion is that posting a comment should be the only way to cast a vote (for articles anyway).
If you want to cast a vote, post a comment and include your vote.
Get rid of the other method, it's silly.
|
|
|
|
|
Like Hans said, most authors expect that when somebody low-votes an article, they leave a comment on "why" they do so. I think that their expectation is very much valid, given the hard work they put in to publish an article. This will keep the lame 1 votes at bay.
There were numerous discussions on this topic before this feature was implemented, any of which which I don't know if you participated in. Now, this topic has been retired permanently, forever, and now is beyond any shadow of reconsideration.
It is a crappy thing, but it's life -^ Carlo Pallini
|
|
|
|
|
Whenever we modify our thread, I believe, till sometime back, CP used to insert a line near the sig indicating a timestamp right. Has something changed?
I needed to recently do a small amendment to one of my post http://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/View.aspx?fid=1645&msg=3022834[^] whilst using the Strike tag in the newer version. The final thread never carried this timestamping.
Am I missing something?
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep!
|
|
|
|
|
The timestamp only appears if you modify the message at least 5 minutes after posting
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Sigs are not being displayed.
|
|
|
|
|
Ooops.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
So, I search in C++ for stack overflow, and a useful and generous list of links are displayed.
Selecting one, I'm off to never never land, where a little cute pixie that strangely looks like Julia Roberts says "not today honey".
My selected article is no where to be found.
What am I missing?
Charlie Gilley
Will program for food...
<italic>Hurtling toward a government of the stupid, by the stupid, for the stupid we go. —Michelle Malkin
This crap sandwich is all yours.... 2009 "Stimulus Bill"
modified on Wednesday, April 29, 2009 4:29 PM
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: So, I search in C++ for stack overflow...
Huh?
"Old age is like a bank account. You withdraw later in life what you have deposited along the way." - Unknown
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
|
|
|
|
|
huh, what? Some applications of C++ do not have infinite stack space.
or did I miss something in how you said, "Huh?" 
Charlie Gilley
Will program for food...
<italic>Hurtling toward a government of the stupid, by the stupid, for the stupid we go. —Michelle Malkin
This crap sandwich is all yours.... 2009 "Stimulus Bill"
|
|
|
|
|
I assume he's searching the C++ articles.
Christian Graus
Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
"I am new to programming world. I have been learning c# for about past four weeks. I am quite acquainted with the fundamentals of c#. Now I have to work on a project which converts given flat files to XML using the XML serialization method" - SK64 ( but the forums have stuff like this posted every day )
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: I'm off to never never land
that probably is an illustration of an overflowing stack, taking forever to load ...
|
|
|
|
|
Searching the forums or the articles?
Searching forums[^] has links that work fine for me.
Searching Articles[^] also works.
Can you send me a link to the search results page that has the missing links?
(moving to the bugs forum)
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Hi guys
I love the site. But I want to read articles when I am not at home. I have a windows mobile phone that I can use to access the site. But when I do the formatting is all messed up.
Have you thought of making a lite - mobile version of the site. Still containing all the same articles of course.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Which device are you using? Can you please head over to http://www.codeproject.com/script/misc/browsercheck.aspx[^] and let me know what it says? Most specifically does it say you're on a mobile device? The site tries to automatically go to a Lite version for mobile devices, but checking can be hit and miss so I may probably have to provide a manual method to move to mobile mode.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I tested this on my O2 XDA Orbit 2 (a rebranded HTC of some kind, I think...) running Windows Mobile 6.1 Professional. Using IE, it reports:
Gecko: False
IE: False
Opera: False
Webkit: False
Browser: UNKNOWN
Type: Unknown
Standard: True
Display Mode: Normal
User Agent: Xda_orbit_2/240x320 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.11)
Version: 0
Major Version: 0
Minor Version: 0
Web 2.0 Enabled: False
Mobile Device: False
Cookies OK? False
Server: Web13
Country: United Kingdom
Using Opera on the same device gives the same, except:
Opera: True
Broswer: OPERA
Type: Opera8
User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; PPC) Opera 8.65 [en]
Version: 8.65
Major Version: 8
Minor Version: 0.65
Web 2.0 Enabled: True
Server: Web11
In Opera, the produced interface is okay (not sure if it's your Lite version, but what i've experimented with is perfectly usable), but in IE, as described above, the interface is IE Mobile's mangling of the full version.
Hope this information is of some use.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi
Your scripts picks my phone as being Mozilla based. (Its not its IE  as it is built in)
I dont know if it is the light version I am seeing. I get a big green bar at the top that is rather annoying. I have not been redirected anywhere. (still on codeproject.com instead of for example mobile.codeproject.com or codeproject.com/mobile dont know if this matters)
If I can find this forum post on my phone I will paste the script's code
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
I've updated the browser definition files. Can you please retry?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I can't see a change in either IE or Opera. I've tried clearing Caches, but didn't seem to make a difference.
|
|
|
|
|
So much for the updates browsers file
That's it: I'm going to hack.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
