|
Thiru Thirunavukarasu wrote: Is it specifically with this tag or whenever you add a new tag to an existing post?
Hi again! I tried with another tag and added 'debug' to an existing post[^] after I provided an answer. Same result, looks like it happens independent of the tag.
/M
|
|
|
|
|
Oh right. The problem here is that when a question's tags gets updated its answers don't reflect the change. This is a known issue that will be fixed sometime next week.
Thanks for the screenshot.
|
|
|
|
|
Due to the recent incident with clearly inappropriate material being allowed through the moderation process, moderation rights will now be restricted to Authors of Gold level or above.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Fair enough.
*Pops over to reputation to see if author of gold level or above*
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx
|
|
|
|
|
< ethereal voice from mystical nowhere >
"Dalek Dave is unlikely to ever be a Gold Author - Let Sadness Encompass His Very Being"
< /ethereal voice from mystical nowhere >
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
|
|
|
|
|
Best done in the voice of Valentine Dyall.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: see if author of gold level or above
There are some modern tools[^] that offer you a pretty accurate list, you know.
|
|
|
|
|
I know. I have one running in Visual Studio
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx
|
|
|
|
|
When you need your thunder back, just give a yell
|
|
|
|
|
How do I get it to run?
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
|
|
|
|
|
download ZIP, extract files, then:
1. either double-click EXE file,
2. or double-click SLN file to open Visual Studio, click Start Debugging or hit F5
finally enter member ID (from your CP profile page), then click GO button or hit ENTER.
healthy alternative: put it on a laptop and jog it around.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: 1. either double-click EXE file,
That is why I cannot make it run, there is no .EXE after I unzip.
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
|
|
|
|
|
huh? when you open the ZIP you should see two EXE files, one of them is CPVanity.exe
extracting all files from the ZIP would create either CPVanity.exe or CPVanity\bin\Debug\CPVanity.exe (both relative to the location of the ZIP file) depending on your ZIP tool's settings.
|
|
|
|
|
DD has to be taking the p, but i don't see a joke icon
I just tried it Luc, nice job by the way. better go and vote the article now!
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks.
Not sure what to think about DD's messages, it is already Thursday after all.
|
|
|
|
|
Hey I was serious, I found the EXE in the end, but it still wouldn't work.
Busy elsewhere but will look later.
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: Hey I was serious, I found the EXE in the end, but it still wouldn't work.
You probably need the latest .NET framework.
|
|
|
|
|
It was build targeting .NET 2.0, shouldn't be a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: it still wouldn't work
You get what that always triggers: not informative, too vague.
If you're behind a firewall, make sure to have the config file next to the EXE.
if your firewall requires a password, read the article and adjust the source where indicated.
if none of that helps, open the project and run inside Visual Studio to see what is going on. The app logs in the output pane.
|
|
|
|
|
Seriously though, what happened? How was there such a major fail?
------------------------------------
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 think approval ability was being based on the overall reputation score.
.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 agree something needs to be done.
Bringing reviewer numbers down to some 80 (35 platinum, <50 gold) which may include some inactive members, may not be the most effective measure:
- if one can reach silver, one can reach gold too;
- and I'm not sure what exactly happened; maybe the account got hijacked.
How about:
1. going after members that wrongfully approve inappropriate material;
2. improving the Article Wizard so some constructs never make it to the Article-Needing-Approval list (e.g. when there are more images than words); I'm convinced a 100 word minimum is way too liberal even for real article attempts.
3. giving golden+ authors an immediate removal option, or at least a put-in-quarantine option. That way the recent issue would have been covered up sooner.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, we don't know what the prior reputation-based criteria was for being able to approve articles (maybe that should be added to the reputation FAQ). In the past, you could become gold simply by longevity. We have people here that have posted less than 500 messages, and no articles, but that have been here six years or more.
At this point, we really don't know how many people are gold or higher on any single reputation category.
Are there really currently fewer than 100 users that can approve articles? Out of almost 7 million? If that's the case, maybe authority score should be considered as well as author score. there are a lot of folks that have high authority, but low author, right?
.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
|
|
|
|
|
My best guess is gold author currently is the criterium for seeing and being able to approve articles-needing-approval, and AFAIK there are some 85 gold+platinum authors, that is what CPVanity tells me when I scan 5+5 pages of Who's Who.
The 7 million number applies to accounts, not people. I expect if Chris were to delete accounts that have never published an article nor more than one message, and never voted, the number would drop significantly. Only yesterday I discovered two fresh accounts with just a single and nonsensical message as a comment on some normal material.
I'm in favor of a real voting scheme for article approval; having a single person approve something does not seem right. I'd go for:
- only silver+ authors and silver+ authorities can see the articles-needing-approval;
- the ANA gets -2, -1, 0, 1, 2 points when voted 1,2,3,4,5; to be multiplied by 2 for silver, 4 for gold, 8 for platinum voter.
- the ANA needs 20 points to become public.
So one platinum 5 and one silver 5 is sufficient; five golden 4's is sufficient; etc.
But a down-vote makes publication much less likely.
And I suggest we get a quarantine button, so things can be hidden immediately, as opposed to the "remove" button which takes an unspecified amount of time (at least to the next working day?)
|
|
|
|
|
I might be advocating for myself here. Please bear.
How about having a bit complex rule for article approval? I am almost sure that I would never make to that level, so I will never be able to at least point out the problems with an article. So, how about letting few guys (based on some numbers) to at least provide comments on the articles needing approval if not approve it?
Right now, I don't have a clue how this can be realized but I hope someone out here can think of a good plan.
|
|
|
|