Article violates Terms
-
I voted this article a 2 originally as i did not think the implementation was well done: RS Focus Component[^]. I also provided detailed reasons for this. After further investigation I noticed that the project relied on a closed source dll, which is against the CodeProject Contributors Agreement[^] to post closed-source libraries:
Note: As a consequence of the frequent virus infections across the internet, CodeProject will no longer accept binary submissions that do not contain full source code, unless the submission is from a recognised company or institution. Shareware or time-limited submissions will not be accepted.
Also after downgrading my vote to one and explaining this, Rameez Raja then proceeded to down vote other articles of mine with comments such as "..." Kris
-
I voted this article a 2 originally as i did not think the implementation was well done: RS Focus Component[^]. I also provided detailed reasons for this. After further investigation I noticed that the project relied on a closed source dll, which is against the CodeProject Contributors Agreement[^] to post closed-source libraries:
Note: As a consequence of the frequent virus infections across the internet, CodeProject will no longer accept binary submissions that do not contain full source code, unless the submission is from a recognised company or institution. Shareware or time-limited submissions will not be accepted.
Also after downgrading my vote to one and explaining this, Rameez Raja then proceeded to down vote other articles of mine with comments such as "..." Kris
Some people think of ratings as a game that you are trying to maximise your score in, so they get very offended when you downvote them. Just ignore or use 'report abuse' on abusive retaliatory downvotes on your own articles. He'll find that annoying you enough to get you to post in the Lounge attracts a few more downvoters though. I don't understand how that article could be rated over 4.5 (as it was before I voted), even not counting the issue you raise here it is poorly written and shallow in content. It must be his mates voting, perhaps ratings on articles shouldn't show until they have (say) 20 ratings.
-
Some people think of ratings as a game that you are trying to maximise your score in, so they get very offended when you downvote them. Just ignore or use 'report abuse' on abusive retaliatory downvotes on your own articles. He'll find that annoying you enough to get you to post in the Lounge attracts a few more downvoters though. I don't understand how that article could be rated over 4.5 (as it was before I voted), even not counting the issue you raise here it is poorly written and shallow in content. It must be his mates voting, perhaps ratings on articles shouldn't show until they have (say) 20 ratings.
I know what you mean by the game, but I think that this retaliation behaviour goes against what CodeProject stands for, people attacking others for down voting just discourages down voting in the first place! I think people should vote how they want to vote (down or up), as long as the person provides reasoning, and gives an open chance of discussion, and, also, the opportunity to change their vote based on the authors response (either reasoning or changing the article). Unfortunately, not all think this way. Kris
-
I know what you mean by the game, but I think that this retaliation behaviour goes against what CodeProject stands for, people attacking others for down voting just discourages down voting in the first place! I think people should vote how they want to vote (down or up), as long as the person provides reasoning, and gives an open chance of discussion, and, also, the opportunity to change their vote based on the authors response (either reasoning or changing the article). Unfortunately, not all think this way. Kris
I had no idea the article relied on a closed-source component. I'm going to investigate further and change my vote if necessary. /ravi
My new year resolution: 2048 x 1536 Home | Articles | My .NET bits | Freeware ravib(at)ravib(dot)com
-
I know what you mean by the game, but I think that this retaliation behaviour goes against what CodeProject stands for, people attacking others for down voting just discourages down voting in the first place! I think people should vote how they want to vote (down or up), as long as the person provides reasoning, and gives an open chance of discussion, and, also, the opportunity to change their vote based on the authors response (either reasoning or changing the article). Unfortunately, not all think this way. Kris
-
I voted this article a 2 originally as i did not think the implementation was well done: RS Focus Component[^]. I also provided detailed reasons for this. After further investigation I noticed that the project relied on a closed source dll, which is against the CodeProject Contributors Agreement[^] to post closed-source libraries:
Note: As a consequence of the frequent virus infections across the internet, CodeProject will no longer accept binary submissions that do not contain full source code, unless the submission is from a recognised company or institution. Shareware or time-limited submissions will not be accepted.
Also after downgrading my vote to one and explaining this, Rameez Raja then proceeded to down vote other articles of mine with comments such as "..." Kris
I'm sorry you are having this problem ! I do think the place to report, and discuss, this kind of problem is the "Spam and Abuse Watch Forum" [^].
"What Turing gave us for the first time (and without Turing you just couldn't do any of this) is he gave us a way of thinking about and taking seriously and thinking in a disciplined way about phenomena that have, as I like to say, trillions of moving parts. Until the late 20th century, nobody knew how to take seriously a machine with a trillion moving parts. It's just mind-boggling." Daniel C. Dennett
-
I voted this article a 2 originally as i did not think the implementation was well done: RS Focus Component[^]. I also provided detailed reasons for this. After further investigation I noticed that the project relied on a closed source dll, which is against the CodeProject Contributors Agreement[^] to post closed-source libraries:
Note: As a consequence of the frequent virus infections across the internet, CodeProject will no longer accept binary submissions that do not contain full source code, unless the submission is from a recognised company or institution. Shareware or time-limited submissions will not be accepted.
Also after downgrading my vote to one and explaining this, Rameez Raja then proceeded to down vote other articles of mine with comments such as "..." Kris
The article is now deleted. Thanks to my Gold Author Rep he lost a lot of his *oh-so-precious* points. Something has backfired, I guess.
Veni, vidi, caecus
-
The article is now deleted. Thanks to my Gold Author Rep he lost a lot of his *oh-so-precious* points. Something has backfired, I guess.
Veni, vidi, caecus
-
I voted this article a 2 originally as i did not think the implementation was well done: RS Focus Component[^]. I also provided detailed reasons for this. After further investigation I noticed that the project relied on a closed source dll, which is against the CodeProject Contributors Agreement[^] to post closed-source libraries:
Note: As a consequence of the frequent virus infections across the internet, CodeProject will no longer accept binary submissions that do not contain full source code, unless the submission is from a recognised company or institution. Shareware or time-limited submissions will not be accepted.
Also after downgrading my vote to one and explaining this, Rameez Raja then proceeded to down vote other articles of mine with comments such as "..." Kris
Looks like the user has been vanished... :)
-
i00 wrote:
I think that this retaliation behaviour goes against what CodeProject stands for
While I can certainly understand your frustration, it seems as though this thread is a bit of retaliation.
Yes ... it does get to me, but only because the author has not
provid[ed] reasoning, and gives an open chance of discussion, and, also, the opportunity to change their vote based on the authors response (either reasoning or changing the article).
I posted several informative posts on his article, and provided code examples of how the project could have been improved. Kris
-
I'm sorry you are having this problem ! I do think the place to report, and discuss, this kind of problem is the "Spam and Abuse Watch Forum" [^].
"What Turing gave us for the first time (and without Turing you just couldn't do any of this) is he gave us a way of thinking about and taking seriously and thinking in a disciplined way about phenomena that have, as I like to say, trillions of moving parts. Until the late 20th century, nobody knew how to take seriously a machine with a trillion moving parts. It's just mind-boggling." Daniel C. Dennett
Thanks for pointing this out to me, I don't use the forums bit much (basically use it to comment on articles). I did look for something like this, but only under the drop-down menus @ the top... didn't realise the item on the left menu, I think that it should also be under the "Help" menu. Kris