|
Message Automatically Removed[^]
edit: of course, with the addition of newer thread/posts, the link no longer homes in on the vanished post.
modified on Thursday, February 07, 2008 3:37:58 AM
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure what you are referring to. Each message has a PermaLink link you can use to specify the message directly
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I thought I'd grabbed the PermaLink, obviously not.
Ah, I was grabbing the URL from the message header. Here's the PermaLink: Message Automatically Removed[^]
What I'm talking about is messages vanishing because certain person(s) (singular, plural -- I don't know, nor do I particularly want to know) don't like what I say.
Look, if these 'atheists' at CP want to make obtuse criticisms against "theism," they really don't have moral right or standing to throw temper-tantrums if I choose to try to explore (to the extent that one can explore anything important in the context of the SoapBox) their criticism.
Here is the exact content of the message -- other than the painful fact that directly pasting '<' and '>' into messages no longer works:
Justice -- 'Atheist' Style
Is it really true that:
<blockquote><a href="http://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/View.aspx?fid=2605&df=90&mpp=25&noise=3&sort=Position&view=Quick&select=2416276&fr=1#xx2416276xx">(in isolation)</a>[<a href="http://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/View.aspx?fid=2605&df=90&mpp=25&noise=3&sort=Position&view=Quick&select=2416276&fr=1#xx2416276xx" target="_blank" title="New Window">^</a>]:
It is certainly more just to simply forgive ... </blockquote>
As a stand-alone claim, this is worse than ludicrous, for it asserts that the negation of justice is "more just" than justice. And, with most ideas that one might want to add to it, the compound claim so generated is still ludicrous.
Nevertheless, that is the sort of "justice" that you folk are demanding (when it benefits you, of course) as the only justice you will deign to accept from God. Happily, God *is* Justice, so such pseudo-justice isn't on offer.
This is the post in full from which the above came:
<blockquote><a href="http://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/View.aspx?fid=2605&df=90&mpp=25&noise=3&sort=Position&view=Quick&select=2416276&fr=1#xx2416276xx">John Carson</a>[<a href="http://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/View.aspx?fid=2605&df=90&mpp=25&noise=3&sort=Position&view=Quick&select=2416276&fr=1#xx2416276xx" target="_blank" title="New Window">^</a>]:
<b>MrPlankton:</b> But would God be just if rebellion/sin were just forgiven with out consequence?
.
<b>John Carson:</b> It is certainly more just to simply forgive than it is to punish the innocent in place of the guilty (assuming, for the sake of argument, that Jesus was innocent). Punishing the innocent, for whatever reason, is the opposite of justice.
The whole idea is just plain stupid and uncivilised. It is that way because the whole story is merely an invention of unjust and uncivilised human beings --- the same sort of people who in other cultures invented gods who required the sacrifice of virgins. </blockquote>
Even Mr Carson's full statement ("<i>It is certainly more just to simply forgive than it is to punish the innocent in place of the guilty ...</i>") isn't *really* correct; for there are no degrees to justice and injustice; justice is absolute.
Mr Carson is asserting that it is "more just" (which is logically impossible) to commit mercy (except that it's a most unjust sort of mercy his statement implies) upon the guily than to commit injustice upon the innocent. Well yes, it is, _definitially_, unjust to commit injustice upon the innocent ... regardless of how the guilty are dealt.
But refraining from committing injustice upon the innocent doesn't address how to deal with the guilty. The question is (and this is what MrPlankton was trying to get at): "<i>How is God to deal with the *guilty?*</i>" To ask the question is to answer it: <i>justly</i>. Anything other that justice is injustice.
"<i>Punishing the innocent, for whatever reason, is the opposite of justice.</i>"
As fate would have it, in a savage blow to Mr Carson's atheology, it turns out that he's barking up the wrong tree: Christ wasn't *merely punished,* as though he were the whipping-boy for some royal brat. Rather, he willingly took our sins into his own person ... he willingly *became* our sins. For all who humble their pride and admit that they are sinners, he took their sins into Hell/Death and left them there.
Amusingly enough, as it was Christ himself who created us (and our Cosmos), one more of the silly 'atheistic' attempted taunts was met long before they even thought to utter it [the one that goes something like this: "<i>whoever is responsible for this mess has some explaining (to me) to do</i>"].
|
|
|
|
|
When we post messages in forum textbox, I would suggest, if you can provide keyboard accelerator keys at least for the most frequently used buttons, it would be cool.
For example, in a typical rich text editor, CTRL+B, CTRL+I, CTRL+U respectively stand for Bold, Italics and Underline. I recall an earlier response from Chris that this is not a true rich text editor. Hence I would suggest each button click can also be wired up to an event handler in JavaScript which can achieve this trick.
This would avoid unnecessary shunting back and forth between keyboard and mouse to provide emphasis in the message.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson
|
|
|
|
|
Now imagine how that can improve quality of Plz! IT'S URGNT!!!!! messages and reduce time to post them. 
Mostly, when you see programmers, they aren't doing anything. One of the attractive things about programmers is that you cannot tell whether or not they are working simply by looking at them. Very often they're sitting there seemingly drinking coffee and gossiping, or just staring into space. What the programmer is trying to do is get a handle on all the individual and unrelated ideas that are scampering around in his head. (Charles M Strauss)
|
|
|
|
|
I just thought that the following text might need a rephrase
View unanswered questions in the <forumname> forum</forumname>
Currently, a thread can be of any of the following category (General, News, Question, Answer, Joke). Hence the word 'question' applying for the thread itself seems to be a misnomer. Perhaps something like 'View threads with no followups' or related could befit more, without any affinity to a particular category of the thread.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson
|
|
|
|
|
This page is there to allow member to find questions that have been unanswered. I see no point in listing jokes that have been unanswered, news items that have been unanswered, or general comments that have been unanswered.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I agree. Perhaps, if I understand right, your view would like 'Questions occupy lions-share of the forum entities and hence that should be given a significant stake as a prominent link to display them separately'. 
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson
|
|
|
|
|
They can be phrased as:
1. View jokes that have not made anyone laugh
2. View news items no one cared about
3. View comments that have not been noticed.
What say you Vasudevan?
You have, what I would term, a very formal turn of phrase not seen in these isles since the old King passed from this world to the next. martin_hughes on VDK
|
|
|
|
|
Vasudevan Deepak K wrote: View unanswered questions in the forum
Maybe more like:
View unanswered threads in this forum?
I am not sure, but most threads in the programming forums do tend to be some kind of question, if it is grammatically formed right
"I guess it's what separates the professionals from the drag and drop, girly wirly, namby pamby, wishy washy, can't code for crap types." - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
I have reported a similar problem 'Reply' link that also triggers a notification to the author of the message. It had a issue like the message email address was carrying the real address of the sender instead of 'forums@codeproject.com'. Thanks to CP Team that they addressed it real quick. ![Rose | [Rose]](https://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/Images/rose.gif)
I just noticed a couple of days back that 'Email' link that generates an email to the author of the message is also afflicted with this syndrome.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson
|
|
|
|
|
This is by design
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
But I guess it was the other way round in Classic CodeProject. Has this feature changed in entirety in new version?
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson
|
|
|
|
|
Hello,
I can't reply to any of the post. I'm getting following error: "There was an error attempting to insert your message." Nothing more. Sometimes I'm getting this error but the post appears in the message board and then disappears. The same is true for posting new message. Sometimes they appear, sometimes not. Is there any problem with CP?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Giorgi Dalakishvili wrote: There was an error attempting to insert your message
Yup. I also recieved it. The messages momentarily appear in the forums perhaps due to caching framework but since they don't seem to be getting persisted in the data store, they are not reflected in the User Profile Messages or visiting the page even a short while later.
Also, this message seems to be acutely significant since the business component seems to be bubbling up the exception message from the database without changing it. I am actually pointing at the word 'insert' which is bit technical.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson
|
|
|
|
|
Vasudevan Deepak K wrote: this message seems to be acutely significant since the business component seems to be bubbling up the exception message from the database without changing it
Incorrect
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Incorrect
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson
|
|
|
|
|
Your hypothesis on what is happening with the error message is incorrect.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Your hypothesis on what is happening with the error message is incorrect.
Ok. I actually guessed that way crediting to a soundex trick. 'insert' is kind of technical word and a SQL key word right?
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson
|
|
|
|
|
All previous posts for every user is marked "new". No big deal, but kind of weird.
Trinity: Neo... nobody has ever done this before.
Neo: That's why it's going to work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
No. Goto your profile and click "Messages Posted". Then you will see the problem.
|
|
|
|
|
I still have reliability and performance issues with CP. On this front, I'm sorry to say, the new CP is no better than the old – perhaps a little worse.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
I think that inherits from Windows and .NET Framework.
Right from the day of migration, CP Team has really put in countless sleepless nights and innumerable weekends to make it at least relatively fast and good now. I admit there are a few issues but did you check out the Sticky Post that Chris has put on top of the 'Suggestions and Bug Reports' forum.
I have a similar plight to share with a ASP.NET website and hence I feel that the problem is not with CP with Microsoft .NET Framework and Windows:
http://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/View.aspx?fid=12076&msg=2415876[^]
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson
|
|
|
|
|
We're working day and night to continually improve things.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
