Evilcry1, and proprietary software
-
For simple functions it's fine, but it always seems awkward to me, and I definitely don't like the syntax for dealing with classes, etc. It's just a personal pet peeve, I find it irritating.
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! Personal 3D projects Just Say No to Web 2 Point Blow
Jim Crafton wrote:
syntax for dealing with classes, etc
yeah, that is rather arcane and obtuse.
Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/ -
Luc Pattyn wrote:
limiting the (down)voting rights of the masses
At least for articles. Or you could require a 50 word explanation. With some heuristics to prevent garbage posts. Perhaps someone with a good reputation could approve the down-vote.
Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/ahmed zahmed wrote:
At least for articles
That is what I meant. Message votes are of lesser importance, as messages typically aren't the result of a big investment of time and effort, articles are.
ahmed zahmed wrote:
Perhaps someone with a good reputation could approve the down-vote
Yeah, an indirect scheme has been proposed only recently (by martin_hughes IIRC); people would be able to comment, and the comments (not the article itself) would be voted upon, resulting in a score for the article itself. IMO there is a lot of merit in such scheme, the major disadvantage would be a bit of delay to get a score. :)
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
Prolific encyclopedia fixture proof-reader browser patron addict?
We all depend on the beast below.
-
ahmed zahmed wrote:
At least for articles
That is what I meant. Message votes are of lesser importance, as messages typically aren't the result of a big investment of time and effort, articles are.
ahmed zahmed wrote:
Perhaps someone with a good reputation could approve the down-vote
Yeah, an indirect scheme has been proposed only recently (by martin_hughes IIRC); people would be able to comment, and the comments (not the article itself) would be voted upon, resulting in a score for the article itself. IMO there is a lot of merit in such scheme, the major disadvantage would be a bit of delay to get a score. :)
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
Prolific encyclopedia fixture proof-reader browser patron addict?
We all depend on the beast below.
Luc Pattyn wrote:
major disadvantage would be a bit of delay to get a score
I don't see that as a disadvantage. Also, if people don't have the wherewithal to wait for their vote to count then their vote must not be worth it.
Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/ -
Luc Pattyn wrote:
It is disappointing to see how a few can drive away a well-intended CP member.
Well in all fairness, if he had just waited a week or two, I'm sure things would have been balanced out. If he had left the article up, after the OP's post here, I'm sure there would have been a number of 5 votes made, given the apparent quality of the article, and that would have sorted the whole thing out.
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! Personal 3D projects Just Say No to Web 2 Point Blow
Yes, maybe he reacted too soon. However he only got "my vote of 1" messages (by people I never heard of before AFAICR), more down-votes than up-votes, and I can't recall any explicit sign of support. I for one did not react because the subject was out of my league. As he intended a couple of follow-up articles and has his own blog anyway, I can well understand his decision to have the article removed; and of course I regret he felt the need to give up on CP. :^)
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
Prolific encyclopedia fixture proof-reader browser patron addict?
We all depend on the beast below.
-
Today, a new contributor http://www.codeproject.com/script/Membership/View.aspx?mid=7098780#About[^] was forced into removing his article http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/3443860/How-I-Can-Delete-my-Article-and-Account.aspx[^]from the code project because it referred to proprietary (paying) software. If the self appointed zealots keep this up, I vote that we remove any article that: - Refers to any version of Windows; Windows is a proprietary, paying operating system. - Refers to any version of visual studio professional; Visual studio is a paying IDE. - Refers to any version of Sourcesafe or TFS: paying products. - Refers to any version of Oracle: Paying products - Refers to any version IIS: Not free. Instead we will occupy ourselves with GNU compiler, the Mono project, and Linux. Get a life, mates, most of us are professional programmers here, and we intend to at least buy a sandwich from what we do. Oh, and don't hesitate to support Evilcry1.
Didn't get a chance to read the article, but I'm somewhat conflicted if the sample code didn't run without buying the accompanying software. Still, if the article was written in such a way that it demonstrates something other than the third party software, then it should have stayed. Though I'd then say it should come with an alternative sample application with, say, a dummy third-party DLL that provides test data rather than fully implementing whatever the third-party DLL does. Just as long as I can download a sample and see it do its thing without having to buy something (even Visual Studio has free express editions, and most companies buy their employees pro copies). And, seriously, who doesn't have a copy of Windows these days (hint: not many, and Code Project is Microsoft oriented anyway)? As far as TFS, IIS, and SourceSafe, those are pretty common (e.g., IIS comes with XP Pro) and there is typically not a third-party that is going to spam Code Project with promo articles (not Microsoft's style). I don't know what Oracle is, so I can't comment on that. And if it does demonstrate something about the third party software, then perhaps it should have been nicely tucked away into product showcase.
-
Today, a new contributor http://www.codeproject.com/script/Membership/View.aspx?mid=7098780#About[^] was forced into removing his article http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/3443860/How-I-Can-Delete-my-Article-and-Account.aspx[^]from the code project because it referred to proprietary (paying) software. If the self appointed zealots keep this up, I vote that we remove any article that: - Refers to any version of Windows; Windows is a proprietary, paying operating system. - Refers to any version of visual studio professional; Visual studio is a paying IDE. - Refers to any version of Sourcesafe or TFS: paying products. - Refers to any version of Oracle: Paying products - Refers to any version IIS: Not free. Instead we will occupy ourselves with GNU compiler, the Mono project, and Linux. Get a life, mates, most of us are professional programmers here, and we intend to at least buy a sandwich from what we do. Oh, and don't hesitate to support Evilcry1.
Replying to my own posts, I should get a life. For those who are interested, the original post has been reposted on http://evilcodecave.blogspot.com/[^] The whole point of discussing this (from my point of view), was, who decides what a valid article is. The original article was vetted by CP, but flamed and down-voted by some Trolls, and the original poster retired his article and cancelled his CP membership. I thought he'd made a valuable contribution. Related links: http://www.codeproject.com/Lounge.aspx?msg=3444113#xx3444113xx[^] http://www.codeproject.com/Lounge.aspx?fid=1159&select=3444101&fr=76#xx0xx[^] Closing down this discussion now (from my side), you guys can rant and troll all you like :rolleyes:
-
Today, a new contributor http://www.codeproject.com/script/Membership/View.aspx?mid=7098780#About[^] was forced into removing his article http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/3443860/How-I-Can-Delete-my-Article-and-Account.aspx[^]from the code project because it referred to proprietary (paying) software. If the self appointed zealots keep this up, I vote that we remove any article that: - Refers to any version of Windows; Windows is a proprietary, paying operating system. - Refers to any version of visual studio professional; Visual studio is a paying IDE. - Refers to any version of Sourcesafe or TFS: paying products. - Refers to any version of Oracle: Paying products - Refers to any version IIS: Not free. Instead we will occupy ourselves with GNU compiler, the Mono project, and Linux. Get a life, mates, most of us are professional programmers here, and we intend to at least buy a sandwich from what we do. Oh, and don't hesitate to support Evilcry1.
Michel Godfroid wrote:
was forced into removing his article
He was not forced to remove either the article or the account. He choose to, a big difference.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
-
Michel Godfroid wrote:
was forced into removing his article
He was not forced to remove either the article or the account. He choose to, a big difference.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
I said I wouldn't reply anymore, but I'll make an exception: this person was new contributor, and, according to me, a valuable one at that. If the community hits on those people, we have a problem. It is not acceptable that non-contributing members can scare off someone. Admitted, he should show some balls, but we should make this environment as friendly as possible.
-
I said I wouldn't reply anymore, but I'll make an exception: this person was new contributor, and, according to me, a valuable one at that. If the community hits on those people, we have a problem. It is not acceptable that non-contributing members can scare off someone. Admitted, he should show some balls, but we should make this environment as friendly as possible.
Sheesh. I spend a weekend with the family and all hell breaks loose here in Valhalla. What was his code about, and what component did it have? I feel that I've missed out here.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
-
Thank you for the support, I really appreciate it :) I'll republish the article and successive (yeah I planned to write a set of articles) on my blog. About the question I think, that to show how works a certain software, commercial or not is not a crime or spam, I casually discovered the software in question and I've founded it a Valid (in 10 years I've seen various bad Filtering Systems) and Flexible solution. The intent was easly to say "hey people here a good library..and here what you can do and how works" and hopefully this will help some coder. Nothing more, also because I'm not the author of the sw in question :) after this bad experience my first and last article here. Just wanted to renovate my appreciation for your words. Have a nice Day, Giuseppe
Why don't you re-post your article and let everyone know that the 3rd party library has a demo version that can be downloaded for free? Will the demo version work with your code? Just a thought. :)
-
Evilcry1 was NOT advertising his own software. He was using a commercial library, which he thought was good. There's nothing wrong with commercial software, if you offer a service, you expect to make a living out of it. What we do in the code project is help other people to become better developers, free, and no strings attached. What we the seniors, get from it, is a reputation, and trough that reputation, employment opportunities, or indeed the chance to flog our software. What we offer is counsel to fledgling developers, who may remain hobbyists all their life (nothing wrong with that) and are just interested in IT, or we may get them to the path of fame and glory, and be the next Google. (Nothing wrong with that either).
I agree with nearly everything you say, but consider what would happen if that rule wasn't enforced, and many of the articles here ended up as advertising white papers: we (the CP members) wouldn't know if an article returned by an article search required us to buy something, or was freely available. Having said that, I am still in favor of loosening the rule a bit, because - as you say - an article about using C# would never be rejected. A CP editor could easily mark an article as being a "commercial article", which would be shown/filtered in search results. Of course, none of this is going to happen, because CP itself is a commercial venture, and I imagine the CP people have gotten used to getting paychecks. Hence the huge fees charged for submissions to the Article Showcase. You can't really fault them for that; it's their site, after all, and the article rules are clearly stated.
Best wishes, Hans
-
Jim Crafton wrote:
Javascript
what's wrong with javascript? I like it... yes i know it's untyped, etc, but so what?
Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/ahmed zahmed wrote:
i know it's untyped
Not true. If you want it on your computer and you don't have voice recognition software, it's typed.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
-
ahmed zahmed wrote:
i know it's untyped
Not true. If you want it on your computer and you don't have voice recognition software, it's typed.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
Hard Typed? you know, hitting the keys really hard?
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
-
Hard Typed? you know, hitting the keys really hard?
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
Bang those keys like a chimpanzee playing the bongos.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
-
Bang those keys like a chimpanzee playing the bongos.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
get your code for nuthin' and your chicks for free?
Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/ -
Today, a new contributor http://www.codeproject.com/script/Membership/View.aspx?mid=7098780#About[^] was forced into removing his article http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/3443860/How-I-Can-Delete-my-Article-and-Account.aspx[^]from the code project because it referred to proprietary (paying) software. If the self appointed zealots keep this up, I vote that we remove any article that: - Refers to any version of Windows; Windows is a proprietary, paying operating system. - Refers to any version of visual studio professional; Visual studio is a paying IDE. - Refers to any version of Sourcesafe or TFS: paying products. - Refers to any version of Oracle: Paying products - Refers to any version IIS: Not free. Instead we will occupy ourselves with GNU compiler, the Mono project, and Linux. Get a life, mates, most of us are professional programmers here, and we intend to at least buy a sandwich from what we do. Oh, and don't hesitate to support Evilcry1.
I respectfully disagree. While he placed disclaimers in the article, I thought it read like a tutorial for a commercial product. I'm surprised it got approved. It wasn't a very good article on top of that. (Saying it's a first article isn't a valid excuse.) As for Windows, IIS and Visual Studio; they are a given and part of the mission of this site. The Code Project isn't about programming in general; it's about programming on Windows and IIS using Visual Studio. Were I in charge, I personally wouldn't approve an article that was completely Oracle centric, especially if it was mostly tutorial in nature. I might approve one that discussed how to make, say, ADO work with Oracle. In the end, Chris Maunder is the ultimate arbiter and I'll defer to him. Incidentally, there is a "Third Party Products" section where the article could have, and probably should have, landed.
-
Sheesh. I spend a weekend with the family and all hell breaks loose here in Valhalla. What was his code about, and what component did it have? I feel that I've missed out here.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
The article in question was about using a commercial product. Not in itself bad, or unusal, however in order to use the code described one would have to purchase the product. As Chris has explained he has tried to limit articles to those that the ordinary development can use, without additional purchases. I believe the author was hit by copy cat voters, once one chimed in about inappropriate material, others echoed the feeling. I also believe the author, with a self professed long history of development took it a little too far with a sour grapes attitude and a "I'll take my toys and leave" approach.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt