|
Hans, read my other post to understand why i don't support this proposition.
I think the Monthly Competition is sufficiant to encourage people to write good articles. otherwise, trolls will invade CP !
|
|
|
|
|
This is a good idea.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris, I have an idea to let the users conduct "fair" polls so easily. Now the if the user takes a survey asking the other users to vote 1 or 5 , the resultant score is hugely influenced by the factor "who" is voting it. If a platinum votes, it's pulls the result to one side no matter how many others have voted the other side. So, just like we have "question","general","news","joke", if we have "poll" option that gets only count and not the weight, the user will be able to get the accurate results.
Just for a preview, I designed a simple option with "poll" icon.
Click here^
If user creates a message using this option, the voters "power" (meaning,Silver,gold,Platinum) would be stripped off. Just getting the raw count.
And so the final result is never affected by "who" votes it. And, if someone abuses the poll , we still have the option to down the message using "spam/abuse" option. Any comments?
Code-Frog:So if this is Pumpkinhead. Time for him to run and hide. It's an interesting thought really.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I guess it could even say
1) 4 votes
2) 1 vote
3) 0 votes
4) 1 vote
5) 2 votes
rather than giving a worked out score - then we could have polls with multiple values
Although a proper poll system would be nicer
|
|
|
|
|
VuNic wrote: Any comments?
I like it the way it is 
Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Velopers, Develprs, Developers!
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
Linkify!|Fold With Us!
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly, adds a bit of mystery when you try and figure out the results 
|
|
|
|
|
Polls are common place on many forum packages. Since CP has never had them, I built the site http://www.MyQuickPoll.com[^] to use in the forums. unfortunately, people do not seem to use it, probably because they are lazy and do not want to take the time to click a link to go to another site to build a poll and some to vote on a poll (although many of the polls posted in CP, by a couple others along with myself, seem to have a decent number of votes).
|
|
|
|
|
Good idea; one person one vote where polls are concerned. To do otherwise is undemocratic.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Hewitt wrote: one person one vote where polls are concerned. To do otherwise is undemocratic.
I got the impression Code Project was a meritocracy.
|
|
|
|
|
For voting I guess it is. But polls could benefit from a more democratic approach (me thinks).
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
We need to incorporate the poll system into the message boards. Simple as that. It will happen.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Chris!
Code-Frog:So if this is Pumpkinhead. Time for him to run and hide. It's an interesting thought really.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Chris,
When I do a search on my name, I get the following error:
No results found (Incorrect syntax near ')'.)
Here's the link[^]
I tried with a couple of other valid names, and also tried giving the keywords but the result is same.
|
|
|
|
|
Will look into this. Thanks.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
After replying to a post the page opens to show your reply right? Ok but when i click on another post to check what someone said then i have 2 open posts (Message View / FireFox2).
Artificial Intelligence is no match for Natural Stupidity
No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness. ~Sheik Abd-al-Kadir
I can't always be wrong ... or can I?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
so we don't feel like were wasting our time posting them here. I appreciate some time passing in order to get a consensus (if that's how you want to run things here).
I would appreciate it if Chris or whoever is responsible for real changes around here take the time to reply to each and every suggestion and indicate whether they are taking it on as a potential change or rejecting it outright.
The growing trend of slapping a license on the article itself here is pretty serious, I'd appreciate an official reply to that thread below.
|
|
|
|
|
John Cardinal wrote: The growing trend of slapping a license on the article itself here is pretty serious, I'd appreciate an official reply to that thread below.
Some variant of this, generally related to the ambigious nature of the default license gets reanimated and flogged back to death every few months. In response to one of the past threads Chris said it was being looked at, but since redoing the licensing scheme was something they could only do once all the ducks needed to be in a row before anything went public.
--
Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm on holidays at the moment ("holidays", I should say) so sorry for being slow on this.
Every author has had the right to apply a licence to their code. Usually this is done in the code itself. We intend to allow developers to provide a licence with their code in a more formal and organised manner in order to protect both the author and the person using the code.
Not having a licence means
a) Readers have to take a chance when they use code, hoping the use of the code is OK
b) Authors are only protected by copyright law and not explicitrly by disclaimers of fitness or suitability of the code
It's not whether or not a licence is applied to code that is the problem, it's the form/wording of the licence.
We're looking at 3 levels: Open use and distribution, Open use and restricted distribution (to ensure author has control over distribution), and restricted (non-commercial/educational) use. The last licence probably won't actually be offered, or if it is, articles licenced such will not be eligible for being picked as editor's choice or be allowed entry in comps. They would be special cases.
There is the thought we should allow other licences BSD, GPL etc. but our feeling is that we do not wish to support GPL licencing, and that other licences out there are not worded tightly enough for our liking. If you are going to have a licence then make it a legally valid one.
Articles would be clearly labelled by licence. You would be able to search by licence level.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I see. How about the content of the article itself (which is the heart of the issue for me)?
I'm seeing people applying a "license" to the content of the article, what I suggest is that any source code or working application that accompany the article in zip files or as downloads be licensed, but surely we are not talking about licensing the concept or wording in the article or small snippets of code that are traditionally pasted into the article text?
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, I didn't catch that it was content, not downloads, that were the issue. Downloads will definitely be the target of licencing. Articles? They will be governed by Terms of Use of the site itself.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
That might need to be made a little clearer to some.
|
|
|
|
|
Steps to reproduce:
1. Change View to Thread View.
2. Click on message that has some replies.
3. Click on View the other X messages in this thread.
4. Click on Next (under orange header).
5. What you will see is a page with no messages.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
