Live Chat Suggestion
-
I think someone just suggested this, but I can't see exactly what he said because he deleted his text and nobody appears to have quoted his entire message. It would be real handy if we had a live chat system: 0) A chat would be initiated when a user poses a question. He could then sit there waiting for someone to respond. In order to start a session, the user would have to specify appropriate tags so that responders could reply to questions within their skill set. 1) When someone responds, the questioner would be given the opportunity to begin a dialog with the responder, or ignore him. 2) The number of people in a given chat session could be limited to a small number (3-4?) so that any given chat session doesn't overwhelm the site. 3) A given user could only restricted to being able to participate in one chat session at a time. 4) To afford private exchanges, the questioner could pose his question and create an invite list with users that are allowed to respond. Potential responders that aren't on the invite list wouldn't see the question in the list of live chat questions. 5) I don't see any reason for online/offline status indicators, because users would actually have to browse to the chat page to see what questions are being posed. 6) There is (as always) a certain group of people that would use this kind of thing for spam, or other kinds of abuse, but a reporting mechanism could be put into place to mitigate this issue to a certain extent. 7) If nobody responds (or if the chat session shows no activity) for a specified time period, the user would be prompted to close the chat and to try again later. If he didn't respond to that prompt in within 30 seconds, the chat session would be automatically shut down. 8) Once a chat session is ended, the questioner is asked to evaluate the quality of the individual responders' assistance, and ratings/reputation would be applied accordingly. The default rating would be 3, so if the user ignores the request for a rating, the responders still receive points for participating in the question. The chat window could be a split window kind of thing where one pane is for conversation, and the other is for code snippets.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010 -
I think someone just suggested this, but I can't see exactly what he said because he deleted his text and nobody appears to have quoted his entire message. It would be real handy if we had a live chat system: 0) A chat would be initiated when a user poses a question. He could then sit there waiting for someone to respond. In order to start a session, the user would have to specify appropriate tags so that responders could reply to questions within their skill set. 1) When someone responds, the questioner would be given the opportunity to begin a dialog with the responder, or ignore him. 2) The number of people in a given chat session could be limited to a small number (3-4?) so that any given chat session doesn't overwhelm the site. 3) A given user could only restricted to being able to participate in one chat session at a time. 4) To afford private exchanges, the questioner could pose his question and create an invite list with users that are allowed to respond. Potential responders that aren't on the invite list wouldn't see the question in the list of live chat questions. 5) I don't see any reason for online/offline status indicators, because users would actually have to browse to the chat page to see what questions are being posed. 6) There is (as always) a certain group of people that would use this kind of thing for spam, or other kinds of abuse, but a reporting mechanism could be put into place to mitigate this issue to a certain extent. 7) If nobody responds (or if the chat session shows no activity) for a specified time period, the user would be prompted to close the chat and to try again later. If he didn't respond to that prompt in within 30 seconds, the chat session would be automatically shut down. 8) Once a chat session is ended, the questioner is asked to evaluate the quality of the individual responders' assistance, and ratings/reputation would be applied accordingly. The default rating would be 3, so if the user ignores the request for a rating, the responders still receive points for participating in the question. The chat window could be a split window kind of thing where one pane is for conversation, and the other is for code snippets.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010I like the idea, but I don't believe it would be practical. 0) Most of the inquirers in the Q&A as it is now, doesn't even respond to requests for clarification 1) If an advisor requests clarification/more details from the inquirer, like what is the inner exception. Then there will be times when the advisor has to sit there while the inquirer gets the information, and I'm sure that it could easily take multiple minutes. I would expect that these chat sessions would take about 15-30 in average (or at least you'll have to reserve the next 15-30 minutes of your life to be sure you have the time required), that represents a lot of effort from an advisor to a single inquirer, an effort which is perfectly fine if it was a paid service. Hell maybe that's an idea, make it a paid service that the Code Project offers and then those members who wishes to support the Code Project could offer their expertise. Personally I would be willing to spend 2-3 hours per week to support the Code Project like that.
My number one dev tool? Google
-
I think someone just suggested this, but I can't see exactly what he said because he deleted his text and nobody appears to have quoted his entire message. It would be real handy if we had a live chat system: 0) A chat would be initiated when a user poses a question. He could then sit there waiting for someone to respond. In order to start a session, the user would have to specify appropriate tags so that responders could reply to questions within their skill set. 1) When someone responds, the questioner would be given the opportunity to begin a dialog with the responder, or ignore him. 2) The number of people in a given chat session could be limited to a small number (3-4?) so that any given chat session doesn't overwhelm the site. 3) A given user could only restricted to being able to participate in one chat session at a time. 4) To afford private exchanges, the questioner could pose his question and create an invite list with users that are allowed to respond. Potential responders that aren't on the invite list wouldn't see the question in the list of live chat questions. 5) I don't see any reason for online/offline status indicators, because users would actually have to browse to the chat page to see what questions are being posed. 6) There is (as always) a certain group of people that would use this kind of thing for spam, or other kinds of abuse, but a reporting mechanism could be put into place to mitigate this issue to a certain extent. 7) If nobody responds (or if the chat session shows no activity) for a specified time period, the user would be prompted to close the chat and to try again later. If he didn't respond to that prompt in within 30 seconds, the chat session would be automatically shut down. 8) Once a chat session is ended, the questioner is asked to evaluate the quality of the individual responders' assistance, and ratings/reputation would be applied accordingly. The default rating would be 3, so if the user ignores the request for a rating, the responders still receive points for participating in the question. The chat window could be a split window kind of thing where one pane is for conversation, and the other is for code snippets.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010Interesting idea, John! Some questions: 1. Will the chat be available for viewing even after it has ended? What if someone comes along a few days later and notices a fatal flaw in the proposed solution (or whatever). How do they add a comment to a closed chat? 2. Do people in a chat get emails like they do now for posts, when someone replies? 3. Instead of transient chats, have you considered permanent chat rooms, that exist in parallel with current forums? For example, a C# Chat Room, etc. It seems to me that this would be more useful in the context of CP. What do you think? 4. The terms "chat room" and "sms speak" go hand in hand. Do you think sms speak should be allowed in CP chat rooms?
Best wishes, Hans
-
Interesting idea, John! Some questions: 1. Will the chat be available for viewing even after it has ended? What if someone comes along a few days later and notices a fatal flaw in the proposed solution (or whatever). How do they add a comment to a closed chat? 2. Do people in a chat get emails like they do now for posts, when someone replies? 3. Instead of transient chats, have you considered permanent chat rooms, that exist in parallel with current forums? For example, a C# Chat Room, etc. It seems to me that this would be more useful in the context of CP. What do you think? 4. The terms "chat room" and "sms speak" go hand in hand. Do you think sms speak should be allowed in CP chat rooms?
Best wishes, Hans
Hans Dietrich wrote:
1. Will the chat be available for viewing even after it has ended? What if someone comes along a few days later and notices a fatal flaw in the proposed solution (or whatever). How do they add a comment to a closed chat?
Well, no, the chat would die when it's ended. I suppose the site could offer to send a transcript (via email) to everyone who participated, and they could accept or refuse the transcript.
Hans Dietrich wrote:
2. Do people in a chat get emails like they do now for posts, when someone replies?
Nope. They're in the chat - they don't need emails, and besides, some email servers can be pretty slow, resulting in emails being sent long after a chat session timeout has closed the session.
Hans Dietrich wrote:
3. Instead of transient chats, have you considered permanent chat rooms, that exist in parallel with current forums? For example, a C# Chat Room, etc. It seems to me that this would be more useful in the context of CP. What do you think?
I suggested that years ago, and the general consensus was that it would be a perfect abuse for trolls, spam, and other abuses.
Hans Dietrich wrote:
4. The terms "chat room" and "sms speak" go hand in hand. Do you think sms speak should be allowed in CP chat rooms?
I don't know if imposing rules about how something is typed into a chat session would be a reasonable thing to do.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"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 -
Interesting idea, John! Some questions: 1. Will the chat be available for viewing even after it has ended? What if someone comes along a few days later and notices a fatal flaw in the proposed solution (or whatever). How do they add a comment to a closed chat? 2. Do people in a chat get emails like they do now for posts, when someone replies? 3. Instead of transient chats, have you considered permanent chat rooms, that exist in parallel with current forums? For example, a C# Chat Room, etc. It seems to me that this would be more useful in the context of CP. What do you think? 4. The terms "chat room" and "sms speak" go hand in hand. Do you think sms speak should be allowed in CP chat rooms?
Best wishes, Hans
Have a 5, just for starting your list with 1 and not 0. Personally, I have always considered the first item in a list the 1st item and not the 0th item.
When I was a coder, we worked on algorithms. Today, we memorize APIs for countless libraries — those libraries have the algorithms - Eric Allman
-
Have a 5, just for starting your list with 1 and not 0. Personally, I have always considered the first item in a list the 1st item and not the 0th item.
When I was a coder, we worked on algorithms. Today, we memorize APIs for countless libraries — those libraries have the algorithms - Eric Allman
Wayne Gaylard wrote:
I have always considered the first item in a list the 1st item and not the 0th item.
So, either you don't code or what code you do is in VB. :-D
Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done. Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett
-
Wayne Gaylard wrote:
I have always considered the first item in a list the 1st item and not the 0th item.
So, either you don't code or what code you do is in VB. :-D
Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done. Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett
Just to let you know the one vote wasn't mine, I gave you a 5. Also just to let you know I have been coding for close on 25 years, using a lot of languages, including many variants of Basic, most of which use 0 to start indexing, but a written list of things to do just does not start with 0. Period. Those people who start written lists with 0 just want other people to know they are programmers.
When I was a coder, we worked on algorithms. Today, we memorize APIs for countless libraries — those libraries have the algorithms - Eric Allman
-
Just to let you know the one vote wasn't mine, I gave you a 5. Also just to let you know I have been coding for close on 25 years, using a lot of languages, including many variants of Basic, most of which use 0 to start indexing, but a written list of things to do just does not start with 0. Period. Those people who start written lists with 0 just want other people to know they are programmers.
When I was a coder, we worked on algorithms. Today, we memorize APIs for countless libraries — those libraries have the algorithms - Eric Allman
Elsewhere I would probably write a list from #1, but the convention hsa grown here that list start with #0 as arrays use 0 based indexes. The VB line is because VB's default is, contrary to other languages, 1 based. I'm around the 30 year mark [if I include skool wot I learnt me code at] for programming. VB is the only one I can think of that uses 1 based arrays.
Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done. Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett
-
Elsewhere I would probably write a list from #1, but the convention hsa grown here that list start with #0 as arrays use 0 based indexes. The VB line is because VB's default is, contrary to other languages, 1 based. I'm around the 30 year mark [if I include skool wot I learnt me code at] for programming. VB is the only one I can think of that uses 1 based arrays.
Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done. Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett
I'm not really one for convention. This particular one just seems to be really silly. :laugh:
When I was a coder, we worked on algorithms. Today, we memorize APIs for countless libraries — those libraries have the algorithms - Eric Allman
-
I think someone just suggested this, but I can't see exactly what he said because he deleted his text and nobody appears to have quoted his entire message. It would be real handy if we had a live chat system: 0) A chat would be initiated when a user poses a question. He could then sit there waiting for someone to respond. In order to start a session, the user would have to specify appropriate tags so that responders could reply to questions within their skill set. 1) When someone responds, the questioner would be given the opportunity to begin a dialog with the responder, or ignore him. 2) The number of people in a given chat session could be limited to a small number (3-4?) so that any given chat session doesn't overwhelm the site. 3) A given user could only restricted to being able to participate in one chat session at a time. 4) To afford private exchanges, the questioner could pose his question and create an invite list with users that are allowed to respond. Potential responders that aren't on the invite list wouldn't see the question in the list of live chat questions. 5) I don't see any reason for online/offline status indicators, because users would actually have to browse to the chat page to see what questions are being posed. 6) There is (as always) a certain group of people that would use this kind of thing for spam, or other kinds of abuse, but a reporting mechanism could be put into place to mitigate this issue to a certain extent. 7) If nobody responds (or if the chat session shows no activity) for a specified time period, the user would be prompted to close the chat and to try again later. If he didn't respond to that prompt in within 30 seconds, the chat session would be automatically shut down. 8) Once a chat session is ended, the questioner is asked to evaluate the quality of the individual responders' assistance, and ratings/reputation would be applied accordingly. The default rating would be 3, so if the user ignores the request for a rating, the responders still receive points for participating in the question. The chat window could be a split window kind of thing where one pane is for conversation, and the other is for code snippets.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010It's an interesting idea but chat is not something we're planning at the moment. I've watched many chat rooms over the years, some old, some just recently opened, and generally what I see is great feedback lost to the general populace, or moaning and groaning sessions that spiral out of control, or discussions that rapidly head off topic and/or get abusive and demanding.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
-
It's an interesting idea but chat is not something we're planning at the moment. I've watched many chat rooms over the years, some old, some just recently opened, and generally what I see is great feedback lost to the general populace, or moaning and groaning sessions that spiral out of control, or discussions that rapidly head off topic and/or get abusive and demanding.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
I could have really used something like that last weekend though. I had (and still have) a bitmap issue that would take days or weeks to get resolved because of the round-trip messages that occur with email or message forums. Using IRC is out of the question for the very reasons you cited, but a well-thought-out chat feature would be really nice to have when we need it.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"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
