|
I have to say that was me who upvoted you for that. But you already knew that... 
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
|
|
|
|
|
mark merrens wrote: Many of us came up with suggestions as to how best to address it but that appears to have been ignored
I've answered your suggestions[^] and we had a good long discussion about the problems involved. As I've said before, I prioritise the issues that occur based on how it affects the operation for the majority of users.
If you have a specific set of downvotes you feel are suspicious then I'll investigate. In looking through your rep I'm seeing a half dozen downvotes in fairly contentious threads in the Soapbox.
Voting abuse is not getting downvoted by someone who you're arguing with in the Soapbox. That's called "expressing a view", albeit anonymously and in a fairly cowardly manner. Voting abuse is getting all your mates to upvote an article, or alternatively downvoting someone elses article, or downvoting all the messages in a forum or thread indiscriminately.
So: my answer to your previous complaint was: "I'd be willing to entertain the idea of allowing newbies up-votes only, and then when they have enough points, they get downvote ability too."
You must understand, though, that the downvotes you received would still be anonymous based on the rep of those who downvoted you. So I would have spent a fair bit of time working to put together a solution that would not solve your problem. The solution to your problem is either don't post stuff that will get you downvoted (no fun!), or only post stuff that will get you downvoted in a forum that doesn't have voting (ie The Backroom) or not have downvotes at all. And I want downvotes. I want members to be able to show disapproval and approval. I'm not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: You must understand, though, that the downvotes you received would still be anonymous based on the rep of those who downvoted you.
And therein lies the real problem: anonymous voting. Many years ago you stopped anyone voting who was not logged in. If we knew who was voting it would encourage the person voting to offer a reason and/or stop frivolous or vindictive voting. Sock puppets would be obvious: they either have a history of only down-voting or this is their first and only post.
If I have a discussion with someone, face to face, we both have to take responsibility for that conversation. That is entirely one-sided here: any member, for any reason can come along and down-vote a post and we are not even allowed to challenge that or ask the reason why? That is wrong and it encourages people to bite their tongue rather than expressing a proper view or opinion. Is that what you are aiming for? I shouldn't have to think about where I post to attempt to mimimize the reaction in case a moral coward decides he doesn't like not just this post, but any others he can down vote even if they are not related.
Perhaps the real solution here is to solicit a vote of members. Ask everyone to vote on which of several preferences they would prefer to deal with this.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
|
|
|
|
|
cf. Previous discussion on this[^] and the messages following that post.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Still, nothing has changed. Why not put a few options to the membership: see what your users and supporters would like to happen. Can't see why that would be a problem.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: I'm not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Well, some of us feel there's no baby in there - just bath water. 
|
|
|
|
|
Why cant we have the info of who voted what? Who gave what rating? Even i tried to figure out why my posts were downvoted and when i ask for a reason, no one replied back.
Naina
Naina
|
|
|
|
|
Simple answer? Human nature. If you see that someone has downvoted you, there will always be a temptation to downvote them in retaliation. I would rather not know who downvoted my posts in order not to engage in this type of behaviour. The other reason is that this will result in a number of sockpuppet accounts being created to continue the attack. In other words, you will still have no idea who did it.
|
|
|
|
|
And yet knowing might discourage random voting. It has to be better than what we have now. Nothing.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
|
|
|
|
|
How old are you?
I've always assumed you were in your 30's yet your wiseness never seems to amaze me.
|
|
|
|
|
Faintly Peculiar wrote: your wiseness never seems to amaze me
Seriously? You also think he's a patronizing, smarmy git? Nice.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
|
|
|
|
|
At the end of the day it is just a post(not an article) that is being downvoted. It has taken you a maximum of two minutes to compose so what if it gets downvoted? The more you bring attention to how you dislike it the more the culprit/culprits are going to enjoy inflicting the one-vote on you.
|
|
|
|
|
That's not the point (and it isn't just posts, it happens to people's articles as well). I don't care about the points (they don't pay my bills) but I am curious about people's motivation: if I were having a conversation, face-to-face, then people would not act in this manner: it seems the internet allows people to behave rudely and cowardly. Why should someone be able to down vote and run? If they knew that we would know who they are then they may be more reluctant to vote without giving a reason. Yes, you will get the odd sock puppet but that would be fairly easy to figure out and remove.
Doing nothing about this will not make it go away.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
|
|
|
|
|
mark merrens wrote: Doing nothing about this will not make it go away.
I would disagree; the more fuss people make about this the more it encourages these scrotes to continue trying to wind us up. Just accept it as part of being a member of an open community, and focus on something important[^].
Binding 100,000 items to a list box can be just silly regardless of what pattern you are following. Jeremy Likness
|
|
|
|
|
It's important to me and I'm not that bothered about the wind up, I am concerned that doing nothing encourages the behavior.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
|
|
|
|
|
mark merrens wrote: It's important to me and I'm not that bothered about the wind up
Obviously you are.
mark merrens wrote: doing nothing encourages the behavior.
On the contrary, making a fuss encourages the behaviour as all the univoters can see how wound up you are getting.
Binding 100,000 items to a list box can be just silly regardless of what pattern you are following. Jeremy Likness
|
|
|
|
|
Nice try but no banana.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
|
|
|
|
|
Say what? 
Binding 100,000 items to a list box can be just silly regardless of what pattern you are following. Jeremy Likness
|
|
|
|
|
3. close, but no bananas[^]
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
|
|
|
|
|
Hello guys..!!
Since two days m trying to post a comment in one of my question..but the comment posting is failing again n again..!!..the alert box shows that it have tried for 3 times but still it failed..!!
Do u know any trick to overcome this..?
|
|
|
|
|
Which Question?
What is the exact failure message?
The HBI (Hamster Buerau of Investigation) will need that information to locate the problem.
Now where is that Detective Emoticon when we need it?
Attempting to load signature...
A NullSignatureException was unhandled.
Message: "No signature exists"
All of the books in the world contain no more information than is broadcast as video in a single large American city in a single year. Not all bits have equal value.
Carl Sagan
|
|
|
|
|
We have tried to add your comment 3 times without success. Our servers are just a little overworked. Sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
Zac Greve wrote: Now where is that Detective Emoticon when we need it?
Chris normally uses  when investigating that turns to  when he realises how stupid the problem was.
Sean uses lube.
Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done.
Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H
OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre
I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer
Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett
|
|
|
|
|
Nagy Vilmos wrote: Sean uses lube
Infused with ![Good Stuff | [The good stuff]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/vegemite.gif) to keep the gerbils hamsters well fed.
|
|
|
|
|
How about an undo vote feature?
I just accidentally voted a 5 for an answer over in QA while scrolling down a page using the mouse. As it really wasn't an answer, just a bit more code that OP had added as an aswer, I missed the ability to undo my vote ...
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
