Changes to the message boards [modified]
-
I'm getting as tired as everyone else of the crap that is going on so I'm proposing the following changes: - I've increased the threshold for messages to disappear if marked as spam - Only silver and above members can mark messages as spam - Your IP address can only vote a limited number of times a minute and also a limited number of times a day - Once you hit 5,000 messages then your profile will simply say "over 5,000 messages" Two more thoughts: 1. I'm tempted to add a "Kick this person out of the lounge" button. It would only be accessible by Gold and above members. Just how abused would this be? 2. I will be replacing the Silver/Gold etc ranking with a ranking based on your participation as an author and as a poster. If you answer questions in the forums that are well received you increase your status; same with your posted articles. You post rubbish and you go down. The only problem with this is how we reward those members who are simply great to have around. The ones who have interesting stories, incitefulinsightful comments, are great moderators of the mood, and whose participation makes CodeProject what it is. Suggestions? -- modified at 10:20 Wednesday 18th July, 2007
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-
I'm getting as tired as everyone else of the crap that is going on so I'm proposing the following changes: - I've increased the threshold for messages to disappear if marked as spam - Only silver and above members can mark messages as spam - Your IP address can only vote a limited number of times a minute and also a limited number of times a day - Once you hit 5,000 messages then your profile will simply say "over 5,000 messages" Two more thoughts: 1. I'm tempted to add a "Kick this person out of the lounge" button. It would only be accessible by Gold and above members. Just how abused would this be? 2. I will be replacing the Silver/Gold etc ranking with a ranking based on your participation as an author and as a poster. If you answer questions in the forums that are well received you increase your status; same with your posted articles. You post rubbish and you go down. The only problem with this is how we reward those members who are simply great to have around. The ones who have interesting stories, incitefulinsightful comments, are great moderators of the mood, and whose participation makes CodeProject what it is. Suggestions? -- modified at 10:20 Wednesday 18th July, 2007
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Well, here are my 2 cent thoughts:
Chris Maunder wrote:
- I've increased the threshold for messages to disappear if marked as spam
Very good.
Chris Maunder wrote:
- Only silver and above members can mark messages as spam
As others already have suggested; make that at least "gold and above".
Chris Maunder wrote:
- Your IP address can only vote a limited number of times a minute and also a limited number of times a day
Perfect.
Chris Maunder wrote:
- Once you hit 5,000 messages then your profile will simply say "over 5,000 messages"
I really don't see the point. They qualify as "you need to get out more", or "does your boss know about this".
Chris Maunder wrote:
1. I'm tempted to add a "Kick this person out of the lounge" button. It would only be accessible by Gold and above members. Just how abused would this be?
Perhaps for Platinum level members. For Gold members it could be considered a recommendation that's posted to CP staff members. I don't know how it works in the background if a post is reported as abusive, but I think the "kicking" feature should work the same.
Chris Maunder wrote:
2. I will be replacing the Silver/Gold etc ranking with a ranking based on your participation as an author and as a poster. If you answer questions in the forums that are well received you increase your status; same with your posted articles
The amount of participation doesn't say anything about a persons skills or mental health. ;) I participate when I have the time and when I do I try hard to help people, or simply making nice conversation, for what it's worth. How other members are able to post 10+ message a day has always baffled me, unless they are staff members. Isn't some kind of voting average kept for each member? Of so, that value could be used for determine how the member should be allowed to vote. Let's say if a member has received a voting average below 3.1, then he/she shouldn't be allowed to vote less than 3. Voting shouldn't be allowed below Silver level, or at least six months after a member has posted his/her first message. The vote average could also work like "credits"; you have to earn them to be able to vote other members
-
I'm getting as tired as everyone else of the crap that is going on so I'm proposing the following changes: - I've increased the threshold for messages to disappear if marked as spam - Only silver and above members can mark messages as spam - Your IP address can only vote a limited number of times a minute and also a limited number of times a day - Once you hit 5,000 messages then your profile will simply say "over 5,000 messages" Two more thoughts: 1. I'm tempted to add a "Kick this person out of the lounge" button. It would only be accessible by Gold and above members. Just how abused would this be? 2. I will be replacing the Silver/Gold etc ranking with a ranking based on your participation as an author and as a poster. If you answer questions in the forums that are well received you increase your status; same with your posted articles. You post rubbish and you go down. The only problem with this is how we reward those members who are simply great to have around. The ones who have interesting stories, incitefulinsightful comments, are great moderators of the mood, and whose participation makes CodeProject what it is. Suggestions? -- modified at 10:20 Wednesday 18th July, 2007
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Chris Maunder wrote:
I've increased the threshold for messages to disappear if marked as spam . . 1. I'm tempted to add a "Kick this person out of the lounge" button. It would only be accessible by Gold and above members. Just how abused would this be?
Same with the Kick'd people. It should take a number of votes to get someone kicked out of the Lounge, or any other forum. Though, once kicked above a certain threshold, voting rights and/or posting rights, both article and forum, get denied. If they keep getting kicked above a certain higher threshold, ban them from the forums entirely. May it also be possible to have old kicked votes die off after a certain amount of time?? Maybe they learn their lesson and get a chance to redeem themselves? Just a quick thought there...
Chris Maunder wrote:
Only silver and above members can mark messages as spam
Or abuse.
Chris Maunder wrote:
Your IP address can only vote a limited number of times a minute and also a limited number of times a day
Different limits for different levels??
Chris Maunder wrote:
Once you hit 5,000 messages then your profile will simply say "over 5,000 messages"
I'd say yes to this. Though, at least in my case, MS wanted a message count for the last year for consideration of MS-MVP status. We might want to keep this around, maybe in some other form?
Chris Maunder wrote:
2. I will be replacing the Silver/Gold etc ranking with a ranking based on your participation as an author and as a poster. If you answer questions in the forums that are well received you increase your status; same with your posted articles. You post rubbish and you go down.
Simply awsome!
Chris Maunder wrote:
The only problem with this is how we reward those members who are simply great to have around. The ones who have interesting stories, incitefulinsightful comments, are great moderators of the mood, and whose participation makes CodeProject what it is. Suggestions?
The Staff can override their rank? Honorary ranks maybe.
-
You still need the ability to vote 1 for the cases where someone has posted an answer that is blatantly wrong. I do this, but only where (I believe) I know what the answer is, am posting it, and I don't want anyone to get misled by a previously posted wrong answer (which is in some way harmful). It's not nice for the person receiving the 1 vote, but it's also not nice for the person with the problem (or anyone else finding the thread) to be sent off on an incorrect route and either waste time with a wrong answer that won't work, or be left with an unsupportable solution.
Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder
Mike Dimmick wrote:
You still need the ability to vote 1 for the cases where someone has posted an answer that is blatantly wrong.
Just post a reply to say that the answer was a pile of pants - both to the idiot that posted it, and to the OP so they know not to take that advice. At the moment there is someone (or possibly more than one person) who is following certain people around and voting one. The purpose of this thread, as I see it, is how to mitigate that.
Upcoming events: * Glasgow: Mock Objects, SQL Server CLR Integration, Reporting Services, db4o, Dependency Injection with Spring ... "I wouldn't say boo to a goose. I'm not a coward, I just realise that it would be largely pointless." My website
-
I agree. That is a very good idea.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan
Yeah, right. You wouldn't have anything to do around here then!
A guide to posting questions on CodeProject[^]
Dave Kreskowiak Microsoft MVP Visual Developer - Visual Basic
2006, 2007 -
Colin Angus Mackay wrote:
I would prefer a voting system that is based on "Click if this answer was useful" style of thing. That way people cannot vote down indiscriminately.
Yes, that is a good idea. I've seen it with Yahoo in their Movies section. They say something like "X people out of Y found this useful" or something like that.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
Paul Conrad wrote:
X people out of Y found this useful
I wouldn't put, "X out of Y", just "X people found this useful". Y can be abused.
Upcoming events: * Glasgow: Mock Objects, SQL Server CLR Integration, Reporting Services, db4o, Dependency Injection with Spring ... "I wouldn't say boo to a goose. I'm not a coward, I just realise that it would be largely pointless." My website
-
Rob Manderson wrote:
I dunno about that. I've got platinum
Rob, I'd trust you with that responsibility. You might not think that you are a good apple, but I recon that you are, at least, a good egg! :-D
Upcoming events: * Glasgow: Mock Objects, SQL Server CLR Integration, Reporting Services, db4o, Dependency Injection with Spring ... "I wouldn't say boo to a goose. I'm not a coward, I just realise that it would be largely pointless." My website
*blush*
Rob Manderson My bloghttp://robmanderson.blogspot.com[^]
-
Paul Conrad wrote:
X people out of Y found this useful
I wouldn't put, "X out of Y", just "X people found this useful". Y can be abused.
Upcoming events: * Glasgow: Mock Objects, SQL Server CLR Integration, Reporting Services, db4o, Dependency Injection with Spring ... "I wouldn't say boo to a goose. I'm not a coward, I just realise that it would be largely pointless." My website
Colin Angus Mackay wrote:
"X people found this useful". Y can be abused.
That is an even better idea. I could see it now, trolls with multiple accounts going over and over the message, and giving it a bad look.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
-
I don't think capping the post count would make much difference, quite frankly. As others have said, giving Platinum members the "kick" privilege (preferably into a "sin bin" for an escalating time period rather than for good. You could sell tickets to watch them sulking while they were in there) has real potential. Something does need to be done about the membership rating system though. The fact that a member can reach Gold just by hanging around and barely posting is testament to that. One of the things I've found works amazingly well on Yahoo Groups is the ability to selectively moderate posts by new members, or those who have been "stirring it a bit". On TS-UK we operate a default policy of keeping new members under moderation until they have a) posted more than 5 messages and b) been a posting member for at least a month. A similar policy in the Lounge could definitely work even here, as casual members rarely post anywhere other than the message boards associated with articles. I'd expect the number of messages which would come through for moderation in the Lounge would be far lower than you would expect. That more than anything else is what we find keeps the lid on things there. Very few messages get rejected, and very few members are on long term moderation.
Anna :rose: Linting the day away :cool: Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter "If mushy peas are the food of the devil, the stotty cake is the frisbee of God"
Anna-Jayne Metcalfe wrote:
On TS-UK we operate a default policy of keeping new members under moderation until they have a) posted more than 5 messages and b) been a posting member for at least a month. A similar policy in the Lounge could definitely work even here, as casual members rarely post anywhere other than the message boards associated with articles.
I like idea. The single problem is who would be the moderators? Does Chris have enough staff to cover the load or do we elect some volunteers for that status?
A guide to posting questions on CodeProject[^]
Dave Kreskowiak Microsoft MVP Visual Developer - Visual Basic
2006, 2007 -
With the revenue that would be generated by a membership fee, Code Project would be able to finance a full-time moderator.
-
Mike Dimmick wrote:
You still need the ability to vote 1 for the cases where someone has posted an answer that is blatantly wrong.
Just post a reply to say that the answer was a pile of pants - both to the idiot that posted it, and to the OP so they know not to take that advice. At the moment there is someone (or possibly more than one person) who is following certain people around and voting one. The purpose of this thread, as I see it, is how to mitigate that.
Upcoming events: * Glasgow: Mock Objects, SQL Server CLR Integration, Reporting Services, db4o, Dependency Injection with Spring ... "I wouldn't say boo to a goose. I'm not a coward, I just realise that it would be largely pointless." My website
Colin Angus Mackay wrote:
Just post a reply to say that the answer was a pile of pants - both to the idiot that posted it, and to the OP so they know not to take that advice.
I like the idea. Negative votes are not good, but negative (constructive) replies are good.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.(John 3:16) :badger:
-
I'm getting as tired as everyone else of the crap that is going on so I'm proposing the following changes: - I've increased the threshold for messages to disappear if marked as spam - Only silver and above members can mark messages as spam - Your IP address can only vote a limited number of times a minute and also a limited number of times a day - Once you hit 5,000 messages then your profile will simply say "over 5,000 messages" Two more thoughts: 1. I'm tempted to add a "Kick this person out of the lounge" button. It would only be accessible by Gold and above members. Just how abused would this be? 2. I will be replacing the Silver/Gold etc ranking with a ranking based on your participation as an author and as a poster. If you answer questions in the forums that are well received you increase your status; same with your posted articles. You post rubbish and you go down. The only problem with this is how we reward those members who are simply great to have around. The ones who have interesting stories, incitefulinsightful comments, are great moderators of the mood, and whose participation makes CodeProject what it is. Suggestions? -- modified at 10:20 Wednesday 18th July, 2007
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Wow the cries of the Loungers have woken up the Lord! The cries were so loud that you ought to. Well done Chris! :beer: Pepol, Now listen, Chris would be going nuts over the "validation" he has to do now. Like..
If( isMeesageASpam(msg)||(isTroll,...||(Poster.status <=Silver)||(poster.totalVotesCastedToday>=..)||(poster.MessageCountToday>=...)||(poster.status!=Platinum)&& (!isPosterLookingLikeKyle_satip_vasud(poster))||...HasPosterBeenKickedOnAssBefore(poster) and upto **poster.ass.hole.size() <=...**:wtf:.*** too much for anyone. So stop throwing suggestions now. Let's accept what he has done for the moment. Later you may post these in the suggestion forum one by one and bug him ;P. Now let him go out and see the sun shine..(that's the reward for you Chris. :-D):beer:
-
Yup! you could have termed this update that way. Well done Chris, if you had implemented this a while before we could have averted a civil war here. OMG! the pages looked so darned with the noise level.. anyway you are right on time fixing the electrical bug on the barbed wires of the Lounge :-D. :jig: Wishes!
Exactly critical.It's literally a "patch" on the arse of some people who were suffering from Loose-Messaging..
:beer:
-
I'm getting as tired as everyone else of the crap that is going on so I'm proposing the following changes: - I've increased the threshold for messages to disappear if marked as spam - Only silver and above members can mark messages as spam - Your IP address can only vote a limited number of times a minute and also a limited number of times a day - Once you hit 5,000 messages then your profile will simply say "over 5,000 messages" Two more thoughts: 1. I'm tempted to add a "Kick this person out of the lounge" button. It would only be accessible by Gold and above members. Just how abused would this be? 2. I will be replacing the Silver/Gold etc ranking with a ranking based on your participation as an author and as a poster. If you answer questions in the forums that are well received you increase your status; same with your posted articles. You post rubbish and you go down. The only problem with this is how we reward those members who are simply great to have around. The ones who have interesting stories, incitefulinsightful comments, are great moderators of the mood, and whose participation makes CodeProject what it is. Suggestions? -- modified at 10:20 Wednesday 18th July, 2007
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
I a quite comfortable with all the proposed changes except perhaps item 2. I have been a member since 2002 and follow the contents of the Lounge (almost religiously) every day but I seldom comment in the lounge unless I feel I have something constructive to add (or just plain bored out of my skull.. which thankfully seldom happens). My concern (perhaps unfounded) would be me receiving a poor ranking just because I am not post happy... Then of course it bring up the point as to how relevant I am to the health of the Lounge if I am seldom active in the dicussions...hmm... In either case I would prefer that CodeProject err on the side of someone being a good citizen until proven otherwise (or at least grandfathering some of the older but quiet members). :) cheers, David
-
I don't think capping the post count would make much difference, quite frankly. As others have said, giving Platinum members the "kick" privilege (preferably into a "sin bin" for an escalating time period rather than for good. You could sell tickets to watch them sulking while they were in there) has real potential. Something does need to be done about the membership rating system though. The fact that a member can reach Gold just by hanging around and barely posting is testament to that. One of the things I've found works amazingly well on Yahoo Groups is the ability to selectively moderate posts by new members, or those who have been "stirring it a bit". On TS-UK we operate a default policy of keeping new members under moderation until they have a) posted more than 5 messages and b) been a posting member for at least a month. A similar policy in the Lounge could definitely work even here, as casual members rarely post anywhere other than the message boards associated with articles. I'd expect the number of messages which would come through for moderation in the Lounge would be far lower than you would expect. That more than anything else is what we find keeps the lid on things there. Very few messages get rejected, and very few members are on long term moderation.
Anna :rose: Linting the day away :cool: Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter "If mushy peas are the food of the devil, the stotty cake is the frisbee of God"
Anna-Jayne Metcalfe wrote:
You could sell tickets to watch them sulking while they were in there) has real potential.
public humiliation is sometimes good, sometimes encouragement for revenge.... :(
Anna-Jayne Metcalfe wrote:
On TS-UK we operate a default policy of keeping new members under moderation until they have
There was a board I visited a few years back that operated similar activities using message count. A person started with -10 messages (this was because he found 0-10 exception more difficult to write than <0 -- he was not a programmer first), and you were in probation until you reached 0. A probationary member could not post in off-topics areas, and could post one (or maybe two) posts a day. If you messed up and had a post removed, your message count was subtracted by 10 for each report. The usually meant you had to stay on probation longer. At worst it meant you had to have 10 good messages for every bad one to break even.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
I'm getting as tired as everyone else of the crap that is going on so I'm proposing the following changes: - I've increased the threshold for messages to disappear if marked as spam - Only silver and above members can mark messages as spam - Your IP address can only vote a limited number of times a minute and also a limited number of times a day - Once you hit 5,000 messages then your profile will simply say "over 5,000 messages" Two more thoughts: 1. I'm tempted to add a "Kick this person out of the lounge" button. It would only be accessible by Gold and above members. Just how abused would this be? 2. I will be replacing the Silver/Gold etc ranking with a ranking based on your participation as an author and as a poster. If you answer questions in the forums that are well received you increase your status; same with your posted articles. You post rubbish and you go down. The only problem with this is how we reward those members who are simply great to have around. The ones who have interesting stories, incitefulinsightful comments, are great moderators of the mood, and whose participation makes CodeProject what it is. Suggestions? -- modified at 10:20 Wednesday 18th July, 2007
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Go for it. I especially like the idea of one's rank being dependent not only on the number posts, but wieghted somehow by answers in the coding forums. Also, I wonder whether voting should be made a "public" matter. You vote, people knwo it's you, and what you've voted. Why not? This isn't a genreal election, but a public forum and as ina public meeting, if you stick your hand up, everyone can see you doing it. cheers fred
-
I'm getting as tired as everyone else of the crap that is going on so I'm proposing the following changes: - I've increased the threshold for messages to disappear if marked as spam - Only silver and above members can mark messages as spam - Your IP address can only vote a limited number of times a minute and also a limited number of times a day - Once you hit 5,000 messages then your profile will simply say "over 5,000 messages" Two more thoughts: 1. I'm tempted to add a "Kick this person out of the lounge" button. It would only be accessible by Gold and above members. Just how abused would this be? 2. I will be replacing the Silver/Gold etc ranking with a ranking based on your participation as an author and as a poster. If you answer questions in the forums that are well received you increase your status; same with your posted articles. You post rubbish and you go down. The only problem with this is how we reward those members who are simply great to have around. The ones who have interesting stories, incitefulinsightful comments, are great moderators of the mood, and whose participation makes CodeProject what it is. Suggestions? -- modified at 10:20 Wednesday 18th July, 2007
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
There have been a lot of comments to Chris' changes and suggestions. I'm creating this post to try and summarize them (more for my benefit, but I think it will help see the general feelings towards each of the changes.
- I've increased the threshold for messages to disappear if marked as spam
There really weren't (m)any comments to this one, so I'm guessing that no one has any problems with it.
- Only silver and above members can mark messages as spam
It seems that the general consensus is that this should be changed to Gold members and above. There is a concern that poorly rated articles will count towards the ranking. [I'm not sure this should actually matter. With the other changes in place for the voting and the ranking, I think this would work itself out.]
- Your IP address can only vote a limited number of times a minute and also a limited number of times a day
Again, there didn't seem to be much on this one. There did seem to be some confusion that this was capping the number of posts per day, but as far as I can tell, it is only limiting the number of votes per day. The IP address is already restricted to 1 vote per article, and this would add a x votes per minute and y votes per day from the same IP address.
- Once you hit 5,000 messages then your profile will simply say "over 5,000 messages"
This one didn't seem to go over very well. The general feeling was that this change wouldn't really have any value, particularly with the other changes in place.
1. I'm tempted to add a "Kick this person out of the lounge" button. It would only be accessible by Gold and above members.
Just how abused would this be?This one generated a lot of feedback, with a lot of different options. 1. Treat it as a vote, and with enough votes the person is banned/removed from the site. The general feeling with this is that the person kicked should be placed on a temporary ban that is reset after a specified period of time. The length of each ban is additive, and the more times a person is banned the longer the ban lasts. After a certain number of bans, they are removed from the site. The ban would prevent them from posting articles or posts for the duration of the ban. 2. Instead of banning/removing the person from the site, hide their posts from everyone else logged in. With the posts hidden, there would be no replies (or at least no new replies). 3. Having a "up vote/down vote". Not much detail on this one, but I thi
-
I'm getting as tired as everyone else of the crap that is going on so I'm proposing the following changes: - I've increased the threshold for messages to disappear if marked as spam - Only silver and above members can mark messages as spam - Your IP address can only vote a limited number of times a minute and also a limited number of times a day - Once you hit 5,000 messages then your profile will simply say "over 5,000 messages" Two more thoughts: 1. I'm tempted to add a "Kick this person out of the lounge" button. It would only be accessible by Gold and above members. Just how abused would this be? 2. I will be replacing the Silver/Gold etc ranking with a ranking based on your participation as an author and as a poster. If you answer questions in the forums that are well received you increase your status; same with your posted articles. You post rubbish and you go down. The only problem with this is how we reward those members who are simply great to have around. The ones who have interesting stories, incitefulinsightful comments, are great moderators of the mood, and whose participation makes CodeProject what it is. Suggestions? -- modified at 10:20 Wednesday 18th July, 2007
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
I'm not sure how option 1 will work out. You will have to implement option 2 also, otherwise there are too many people with the "wrong" rating kicking people out. I don't want that to happen, because it scares people away who are just here to ask questions and have a good time. Option 2 is great, but I think you should make a bit of a split here, make someone gold when he gets good scores on the boards. Because people will get voted up when their comments are either fun, insightfull or otherwise good to have. On the other hand, there should also be a good score for people posting articles that are useful. In my opinion, option 1 and 2 have to be implemented together or not at all, the one can't live without the other.
WM. What about weapons of mass-construction? "What? Its an Apple MacBook Pro. They are sexy!" - Paul Watson My blog
-
There have been a lot of comments to Chris' changes and suggestions. I'm creating this post to try and summarize them (more for my benefit, but I think it will help see the general feelings towards each of the changes.
- I've increased the threshold for messages to disappear if marked as spam
There really weren't (m)any comments to this one, so I'm guessing that no one has any problems with it.
- Only silver and above members can mark messages as spam
It seems that the general consensus is that this should be changed to Gold members and above. There is a concern that poorly rated articles will count towards the ranking. [I'm not sure this should actually matter. With the other changes in place for the voting and the ranking, I think this would work itself out.]
- Your IP address can only vote a limited number of times a minute and also a limited number of times a day
Again, there didn't seem to be much on this one. There did seem to be some confusion that this was capping the number of posts per day, but as far as I can tell, it is only limiting the number of votes per day. The IP address is already restricted to 1 vote per article, and this would add a x votes per minute and y votes per day from the same IP address.
- Once you hit 5,000 messages then your profile will simply say "over 5,000 messages"
This one didn't seem to go over very well. The general feeling was that this change wouldn't really have any value, particularly with the other changes in place.
1. I'm tempted to add a "Kick this person out of the lounge" button. It would only be accessible by Gold and above members.
Just how abused would this be?This one generated a lot of feedback, with a lot of different options. 1. Treat it as a vote, and with enough votes the person is banned/removed from the site. The general feeling with this is that the person kicked should be placed on a temporary ban that is reset after a specified period of time. The length of each ban is additive, and the more times a person is banned the longer the ban lasts. After a certain number of bans, they are removed from the site. The ban would prevent them from posting articles or posts for the duration of the ban. 2. Instead of banning/removing the person from the site, hide their posts from everyone else logged in. With the posts hidden, there would be no replies (or at least no new replies). 3. Having a "up vote/down vote". Not much detail on this one, but I thi
Scott Dorman wrote:
1. I'm tempted to add a "Kick this person out of the lounge" button. It would only be accessible by Gold and above members.Just how abused would this be? This one generated a lot of feedback, with a lot of different options. 1. Treat it as a vote, and with enough votes the person is banned/removed from the site. The general feeling with this is that the person kicked should be placed on a temporary ban that is reset after a specified period of time. The length of each ban is additive, and the more times a person is banned the longer the ban lasts. After a certain number of bans, they are removed from the site. The ban would prevent them from posting articles or posts for the duration of the ban.
Hey, that's a good idea. I was thinking something like that, but I couldn't write it down like that.
WM. What about weapons of mass-construction? "What? Its an Apple MacBook Pro. They are sexy!" - Paul Watson My blog
-
I'm getting as tired as everyone else of the crap that is going on so I'm proposing the following changes: - I've increased the threshold for messages to disappear if marked as spam - Only silver and above members can mark messages as spam - Your IP address can only vote a limited number of times a minute and also a limited number of times a day - Once you hit 5,000 messages then your profile will simply say "over 5,000 messages" Two more thoughts: 1. I'm tempted to add a "Kick this person out of the lounge" button. It would only be accessible by Gold and above members. Just how abused would this be? 2. I will be replacing the Silver/Gold etc ranking with a ranking based on your participation as an author and as a poster. If you answer questions in the forums that are well received you increase your status; same with your posted articles. You post rubbish and you go down. The only problem with this is how we reward those members who are simply great to have around. The ones who have interesting stories, incitefulinsightful comments, are great moderators of the mood, and whose participation makes CodeProject what it is. Suggestions? -- modified at 10:20 Wednesday 18th July, 2007
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Chris Maunder wrote:
The only problem with this is how we reward those members who are simply great to have around.
Really Chris, you don't need to compensate me in any way... :)
"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