|
C-P-User-3 wrote: it appears to be creating an absolutely wrong and totally unintended impact; i.e., folks here seem to think (my inference from initial comments) that I'm spamming/advertising the place.
I just read the responses and not one of them suggests that.
Veni, vidi, abiit domum
|
|
|
|
|
You might want to re-read what you posted. All you sais was that "this site just popped up on my desktop". What do you think that means to us??
You didn't say "Hey, what's your opinion of this site?". That probably would have changed the types of responses you got.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remove items from the moderation queue that are currently locked for editing.
A bit pointless allowing people to comment/report/approve or whatever when the item is currently being edited. Pop it back onto the queue when the editing is complete/lock released.
|
|
|
|
|
Choosen tags are not getting saved in Top Article Tab.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Guys
Is there a way I can query CP for metrics on its 10000000+ members?
Specifically what I'm thinking of is a way to ask: Give me a count of all members with more than 10 years experience who are active on the site, collated by programming language?
And it might return me raw numbers (no personal info) that could be feasibly be rendered into a bar-chart.
I realise that we already have the daily/weekly digests of article mods, but this would allow me to comprehend the trends much more easily.
Perhaps this could even be a permanent-ish graph on CP showing how what's-being-worked-on is changing over time, with the possibility of pre-filtering what data gets included in the graph.
Just an idea.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think its possible with the data that CP has on us. Right now the only way to know what languages we have experience in is to parse our profile description or look at the tags of our posts. This would be a lot easier if it had profile fields for experience and languages, but it doesn't.
Right now I think the best you could get is active members, years they are a member, and most active tags/forums. Doesn't really give you much about experience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
If I go to page 9 of the Lounge (either directly, or through the next button) then click on any topic, IE crashes. (IE10, Windows 8, Web03)
Only page 9. Very odd.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, that same thing happened a couple of months ago. A few of us talked about it[^] in the Lounge.
Try changing the number of posts you have per page, that should change what page it happens on.
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
Coolio... thanks for that. I just waited till the topic I wanted to read moved to page 10... Would be interesting to know why it's happening though!!
|
|
|
|
|
I'll post a new note here to suggest that CodeProject forums support sorting by the latest postings, or to sort threads by the most recent update date (any change/addition to the thread).
Now I could just upvote suggestions from the past on this same topic, but no one would ever see that action unless they dug into history. And that's exactly the point here. If someone necromances a thread, even a fairly recent one in an active group, no one will see their update unless they happen to be scrolling back into history. We should have the option to see the most recent activity in the group - that's standard in every other forum package. (Not being snotty, really, just citing precendent...)
This has been an open request here for over 13 years that I can (with a search on the word 'sort'). I'm really hoping this one is finally put into the priority list.
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
We actually implemented this a long time ago and then disabled it.
Sorting by date-last-touched only works in Thread View. In normal view it means that there will, inevitably, by a thread that gets stuck at the top. The longer it's at the top the more people will post. The more people post to it the longer it stays at the front. Eventually the first 10, 20 or 50 pages will be that same thread and the forum is choked to death.
So no - not going to happen I'm afraid.
|
|
|
|
|
Sincere thanks for your comment - and of course for the initial attempt.
It seems to me that popular threads eventually fizzle out, usually within a few days really, though sure, some go on for weeks. When they're resurrected they'll hang there for just a few days more, but all discussions like this fade with time. Discussions that go on too long, digressing into unproductivity, should be closed by the manager.
That some discussions become heated and remain at the top of activity isn't a bug or flaw. That's what people want to discuss ... until they don't want to talk about it anymore.
What you're describing is the notion that newer threads will have priority over older ones which people would like to continue discussing. That's like telling someone you're on the phone with that you need to break to answer the other line. The latest call is not always the most important one.
I respectfully request that this concept not be rejected, but re-visited, perhaps allowing article author/managers to determine how they'd like their group to function. Or at least I'm hoping that this topic be kept open for some upvotes and re-evaluation, as people are often discouraged from upvoting an idea that's already rejected. Of course in a short amount of time it will fall off the top and no one will see it again, so it doesn't need to remain open for long. 
Thanks again.
|
|
|
|
|
Just my 2c, Chris.
Having been writing ToDoList for 10 years now, I often find that problems that once seemed intractable to me are more easily solved when I revisit them with fresh eyes and more experience.
And I don't doubt that you have developers on your team that are both bright enough and experienced enough to solve this issue, because it really is a big issue IMO 
|
|
|
|
|
We've actually solved it, nicely, at the technical level
It's the "how to avoid the inevitable log jam" that's the issue.
|
|
|
|
|
No disrespect intended (sincerely) but if it's a great technical solution that doesn't work in practice perhaps a rethink is in order...
|
|
|
|
|
LOL.
I know what you mean, but I'm sure even you know that a great solution the solves every problem except a user's perception isn't such a great solution.
Did you red my not about thread stagnancy? Any suggestions on how to work around that? I'm all for adding back the mode, but don't want to stifle the discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
Give threads a "death date", which is the latest date by which they can be sorted... For example, if you only want threads to stay on top for a maximum of 3 days, the death date would be the posting date + 3.
Personally the only way I think this would work is that you only see the main thread in the thread list and have to click on it to open a new page that just views that thread. There are a lot of forums that work that way. Adding a "death date" would help from people bumping threads up.
Edit: After more thought, it really doesn't solve the problem, just mitigates it a bit. The only real way I see it is to give people the power to lock a thread when its use has been worn out, or let people sort by last post date or newest thread date.
|
|
|
|
|
I think reddit has a system that allows popular questions to stay on top for a longer time.
I once read something about it, but don't remember when and where that was. (Probably a link to a blog in the daily news  )
The "importance" (the order in which they are displayed) is a combination of time + popularity (upvotes and/or comments). So many comments and/or many upvotes on a discussion increase the popularity of it. And now the catch: if the thread gets older an increasing amount of upvotes is needed to keep it on top.
so the popularity generated by a votes/comments decreases over time (preferably exponentially so you'd have a high influence in the beginning that slowly starts to fade away and you'd ultimately have the threads in the order they were added as the influence of votes/comments approaches zero)
I'm not saying that something like that is a solution for codeproject. It's just an idea of how to work around threads staying on the top for too long. I think the difficulty is: how to you prevent new posts from drowning in many popular threads? You'd probably have to experiment a bit with the factors like how fast does the value of new comments/votes decrease and how strong their influence is. And also probably: How do you prevent such a system from having to recalculate everything every few seconds just because someone upvoted a comment  )
[Edit]
I think I found the post about reddit's ranking system: http://amix.dk/blog/post/19588[^]
|
|
|
|
|
In the product VAXnotes, there were three options used to navigate.
Next Note (here that would be next Topic)
Next Reply
and Next Unseen
In the case that a reply was posted to a topic from (long ago), Next Unseen would eventually get you there.
I do not really think that would be an option here though.
Reference linkity
Question on NEXT UNSEEN in VAXNotes[^]
!bVagadishnu
|
|
|
|
|
There's a reply button on one[^] of Nagy's posts in the Lounge, but I seem to lack the right to post a reply;
Items that need attention:
You do not have permission to perform this action
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
"The man" is keeping you down... the reply link works for me, at least I get to the page that I can post a reply.
Do you get this after you hit post, or just after hitting reply?
|
|
|
|
|
I received 2 similar emails whenever that user posted in the forum of my Combination in C++[^] article.
Please kindly look into it.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
