|
In CodeProject Home Page....from "....items need approval", go to any Article/blog for which feedback is asked...and select any option for feedback, I am getting an error saying "Not enough information supplied"
Do you also experience the same ?
modified 26-Aug-16 21:24pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Report at Bugs & Sugs: Bugs and Suggestions[^]
“Thinking is the hardest work there is …”
modified 21-Nov-20 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Sure..want to confirm the scope too.
|
|
|
|
|
Wrong forum (I've moved this post) and problem fixed.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks 
|
|
|
|
|
I cannot go past the first page of search results for ANY search.
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
The metaphorical solid rear-end expulsions have impacted the metaphorical motorized bladed rotating air movement mechanism.
Do questions with multiple question marks annoy you???
|
|
|
|
|
I'm on it,
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Any progress? When I select the category to filter the result it works but when I go to the next page it reverses back to "Everything".
Thanks Chris!
T.
|
|
|
|
|
Trying to flag this pending article[^] as "format/layout issues", due to the unformatted code blocks.
The flag disappears, and is replaced with a second copy of the site, with the message: Not enough information supplied.
CodeProject-Article-Flag-Bug.png (26 KB)[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
We've just done a release after a fairly major refactor and it's exposed a number of cases not covered by tests. It's friday night so I have beer and am working my way through them.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Still in WIP
|
|
|
|
|
WIP?
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I mean...Work in Progress ....regarding the fix for that error. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
I posted a replay to Super Lloyd and it's not shown publicly yet. I think you need my complaint to post here. Aren't you? 
modified 26-Aug-16 15:10pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Gonzalez wrote: and it's not shown publicly yet.
Probably got flagged in the moderation queue. Just wait some time and let it show up.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
The "filter process" not working as I see it. It needs a human intervention to make it work. I see it many times. You know it's been over 20 min and yet couldn't approved it. This is insane.
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Gonzalez wrote: it's been over 20 min and yet couldn't approved it. This is insane.
You do realize this site is run by volunteers and many, I believe, are in their evening and nighttime now?
I suggest next time, don't curse and swear and then your message will go straight through. 
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Aha. Here it goes. This is the catch! Waiting my moment. BTW, if you don't bring a solution(my message to be shown), no need to answer my question. You are not the right person to solve the problem. Just you are opening useless conversation.
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Gonzalez wrote: Just you are opening useless conversation.
Ahhh, that hurts my feelings.  I was totally enthralled by your side of the conversation. Sorry for dropping the ball. I shall never speak to you again. 
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
This is another useless conversation that doesn't relate to my problem. Do a favor for yourself, check yourself, mentally plus altitude.
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Gonzalez wrote: check yourself, mentally plus altitude.
Done. Mostly there and at about 1000 ft above sea level. What else can I do for you?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: What else can I do for you?
As you said it before Please don't replay to my message. You are not the right person for the solution of the problem. You quickly turned my problem to useless conversation.
modified 26-Aug-16 16:00pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Can you please provide a link to the message you were replying to and I'll take a look.
There are lots and lots of members online ready to approve messages. Maybe yours was inadvertently marked as spam or abusive? One never knows how the community will react.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Well, it shown now after an hour since I posted. [^].
|
|
|
|
|
Just for curiosity's sake: was that reply to Super Lloyd meant to be sarcastic or genuine?
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
