|
How about a hug smiley?
Maybe I would be the only user but it would be nice to have a positive smiley.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google
- the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get
- use the code block button (PRE tags) to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets
|
|
|
|
|
That would be good - the rose always seems kind of effeminate (man points and all that!) and a thumbs up doesn't cut it when expressing an emotion. A hug is cool though!
DaveBTW, in software, hope and pray is not a viable strategy. (Luc Pattyn)Visual Basic is not used by normal people so we're not covering it here. (Uncyclopedia)
|
|
|
|
|
To quote Poison "Every rose has it's thorn" 
|
|
|
|
|
Wouldn't we then need a "gerroff" smiley?
Iain.
ps, I like the hugz idea too.
Codeproject MVP for C++, I can't believe it's for my lounge posts...
|
|
|
|
|
I think you should have simply removed the ability to vote instead of removing the ability to post.
"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." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed. Giving children weapons never leads to a good outcome.
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Graham wrote: Giving children weapons never leads to a good outcome
Is that any less true for the Lounge or the forums where telling someone what they don't want to hear will garner a "1?"
Problem I see is that unless you remove voting for the articles as well, there will be too many folks unavoting someones's serious work because they didn't like the joke they told in the all-talk forums. I know Simmons already has a problem with this and those times where I've been tempted to publish, I've held back because I was pretty sure I'd get low-balled.
Jon
Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
|
|
|
|
|
Oakman wrote: I've held back because I was pretty sure I'd get low-balled.
You know that doctor's have creams for that now don't you?
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: You know that doctor's have creams for that now don't you?
Now if this was the After 8 lounge the juxtaposition of cream and - never mind. 
Jon
Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
|
|
|
|
|
It's 8.50 here in the UK. Feel free to after 8 it. 
|
|
|
|
|
Please see my post here[^].
The Soapbox long ago degenerated into a forum that has nothing to do with Software Development and everything to do with encouraging flame wars, political wars and personal vendettas. There are so, SO many other forums on the net where this sort of stuff is better suited.
I want the site I spend every spare second of my waking life working on to be a site that encourages members to do and be their best. The Soapbox did nothing more than implicitly promote the very behaviour I was trying to discourage.
Do you honestly think removing the ability to vote on a message would do anything to change the way some members behaved in that forum?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: The Soapbox long ago degenerated into a forum that has nothing to do with Software Development and everything to do with encouraging flame wars, political wars and personal vendettas.
Whoa! The Soapbox was *never* supposed to be about software development. In fact, it was put in place to corral conversations we didn't want in the Lounge, namely, political and religious discussions (and flame wars), and personal attacks, vendettas, and flame wars.
Chris Maunder wrote: There are so, SO many other forums on the net where this sort of stuff is better suited.
Yeah, but the vast majority of us don't join a site just to get into those types of discussions, and it's pretty convenient if we want to speak our mind if we can go local (on a single site) to do it. Before we started getting so many over-sensitive users, it was pretty docile in the Soapbox.
Chris Maunder wrote: The Soapbox did nothing more than implicitly promote the very behaviour I was trying to discourage.
I see it more as a pressure relief valve. After all, the stuff in the Soapbox *belongs* in the Soapbox.
Chris Maunder wrote: Do you honestly think removing the ability to vote on a message would do anything to change the way some members behaved in that forum?
It would return the Soapbox to what it's supposed to be. With almost 6 million users, you're guaranteed to get a certain set of people that are just out to piss everyone else off. There is NOTHING anyone can do about it short of severely controlling access to the board (something your advertisers won't be happy about). If you give that set of people a place to post on the site, they will not (for the most part) be posting in the Lounge.
Yeah, it's a dirty rotten shame that you have to babysit the troublemakers (Ilion, to name just one), but hey, that comes with the job (and I don't envy you your position). If I had any workable ideas on controlling the idiots, I'd certainly speak up, but I can't think of anything that is viable.
I think shutting down the Soapbox is a mistake.
"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." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Chris,
I for one am not interested in the Soapbox messages, I visit this site for programming stuff; I participate to some extent in the Lounge, I avoid the Soapbox. So I wouldn't bother posting about it but now the topic is spreading over the bugs&sugs forum.
If it works as a pressure relief valve, as JSOP has put it, then that is OK; if it takes two or more soapboxes to get that done (Soapbox Light and Soapbox Extreme), fine by me. As long as those messages stay away from the programming forums, and to a lesser degree from the Lounge.
I am under the impression a lot of people are active in the Soapbox only. How they matter to you and your advertisers is beyond me. Why not just give them their toy, and ignore the soapbox as much as possible. I do hope you don't count the soapbox messages and votes in qualifying membership status. BTW, dito for Lounge...
IMO voting in Soapbox could be quite different from voting everywhere else. Why should posters be able to judge and remove other peoples messages there? If you reduce the power they have, things might calm down.
And why not automatically remove all soapbox messages that are older than say 7 days, so the amount of soap remains limited, and the drive to rant might lower a bit?
Just my 2 eurocents.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google
- the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get
- use the code block button (PRE tags) to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: And why not automatically remove all soapbox messages that are older than say 7 days, so the amount of soap remains limited, and the drive to rant might lower a bit?
There are some classic messages in there from gentler and kinder days. Purging it would be a real shame.
"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." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps the Soapbox needs to be separated out in the same way that we have a separate LAMP domain.
|
|
|
|
|
hi,
i guess many of the guys and gurls here are making their fingers
dirty by writing code.
i think its a good idea to open a forum where everyone can show his or her masterpiece to the world and ask for beta testing remarks
wat u're sayin' ?
avi
and another thing :
there is no smily that represents: "hey, i got an idea! (lamp thing)"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Messages, from people who have never had this happen, are being marked "automatically removed" within moments of posting. From the looks of it, someone is getting to "remove" vote six to ten times in very quick succession.
Edit
No. I was wrong. Looking at messages posted, it's obvious that messages are beging deleted after 1 vote.
Jon
Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
modified on Saturday, February 28, 2009 12:47 PM
|
|
|
|
|
What seems odd is that messages are deleted with low vote counts, that could just mean the vote tallies are updated after the deletion has already happened, resulting in an incorrect vote tally. It would depend on how the automatic deletion was implemented, and how that related to post scores/vote counts... I don't see the discrepancy as ruling out an abuse of the normal system, but rather as a possible indicator of the close timing of the abuse votes needed to delete the post...
|
|
|
|
|
From Maunders post in the SB, looks like it has suffered a death by a thousand "automatically removed". The SB in no more unless there is a change of heart. My very last posting in SB is coloured red (some giving it 5 votes) is marked Automatically Removed and that is strange. However, I would have liked Maunder to have given the original poster of such messages marked as Automatically Removed the option to delete their post. This at least would have given the honourable members the opportunity to clean-up after themselves thus making the SB less like a council rubbish tip.
modified 1-Aug-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard A. Abbott wrote: From Maunders post in the SB, looks like it has suffered a death by a thousand "automatically removed".
It really appears as if the regs are being punished because there was a security breach. Too bad. In between the back-biting there were some intelligent and insightful discussions going on in there. My fear is that the back-biting will transfer to the Lounge, but the discussion on economics will disappear.
Jon
Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
|
|
|
|
|
Not at all. My reasoning is here[^]
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
With "kid sister friendly words and terminology" there is no reason for economic discussions to come to an end. Unless Maunder reflects on the voting system, including abuse marking of postings, the Lounge could indeed suffer, but then, or so I understand, prior to those 9/11 incidents, the Lounge was the place to talk prior to the launch of the Soapbox forum. Intelligent and insightfulness could re-invade the Lounge but may need some degree of active moderation by CP Admin.
Perhaps Chris Maunder would do himself and CP a great service by updating the Lounge message posting rules to include exceptions in terms of what can and what must not be discussed, but would this kind of "censorship" be acceptable to CP members. However, nice thoughts by Digital Man over in the Lounge but I feel this would be a non-starter.
modified 1-Aug-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
One of my messages was deleted without a single vote being cast. Someone was either bypassing the site's restrictions on removing messages, or a new type of moderation system was being tested (unlikely)
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
