Quality of Code Project diminishing
-
d@nish wrote:
Your point of having editors is great if they are just after language. But content, no.
I meant vetting overall article quality, not controlling the subject of the article. All I'm suggesting is a higher bar for content acceptance will be a good thing. /ravi
My new year resolution: 2048 x 1536 Home | Articles | My .NET bits | Freeware ravib(at)ravib(dot)com
-
Define bar. You cannot be vague and ranting at the same time. What are you cribbing about? And please be specific.
My CP workspace: Incredibly trivial and probably useless code samples[^]
I'm neither ranting nor cribbing - just offering constructive criticism. I'm sorry if you don't see it that way. I'm glad you enjoy the communal spirit of CP. I do too. /ravi
My new year resolution: 2048 x 1536 Home | Articles | My .NET bits | Freeware ravib(at)ravib(dot)com
-
I'm neither ranting nor cribbing - just offering constructive criticism. I'm sorry if you don't see it that way. I'm glad you enjoy the communal spirit of CP. I do too. /ravi
My new year resolution: 2048 x 1536 Home | Articles | My .NET bits | Freeware ravib(at)ravib(dot)com
-
No I am not getting emotional here. You really need to define bar.
My CP workspace: Incredibly trivial and probably useless code samples[^]
-
Or a good place to go knock back a few. :)
Sometimes the true reward for completing a task is not the money, but instead the satisfaction of a job well done. But it's usually the money.
-
Mike, at no time have I ever intended insult. I intend discussion, no matter how heated. Your defense of Chris may be laudable but no defense is required. When discussions become heated (as this one has), I take caution to avoid ad hominem arguments. Insulting is an ad hominem argument. When an individual (in this case Chris) takes an action for selfish reasons, failing to consider the 10 million+ folks who supposedly use this site, then that is wrong and that individual needs to be taken down. Be careful how you interpret my comments. I hold CP, its founder, and its staff in the highest regards. I would not spend the time to write articles and answer member's questions if I did not. I have never questioned the intent of Chris or the CP staff except in the case of moving a page. However when something is amiss, I will make known the problem. In forensics (formal debate) I am not squeamish. And I do not plan to become squeamish! If you consider forcefulness as insulting then I fear the problem is with your definition, not with my assertiveness.
Gus Gustafson
Gus, I'm not sure I should have to have the responsibility of interpreting your comments. I read what you wrote and pointed out to you that you lost me. Perhaps you should keep responsibility yourself for what you choose to write.
gggustafson wrote:
When discussions become heated (as this one has), I take caution to avoid ad hominem arguments. Insulting is an ad hominem argument. When an individual (in this case Chris) takes an action for selfish reasons, failing to consider the 10 million+ folks who supposedly use this site, then that is wrong and that individual needs to be taken down.
You lose me with statements just like this. Do you realize what you're saying in this statement? You think Chris needs to be 'taken down'? You presume to have the wisdom to conclude that? You say no defense of Chris is required, yet you clearly are attacking him - you just wrote he needs to be 'taken down'. Are you sure you're not intending insult? It sounds like in spite of your protests, you certainly do. I'm not even interpreting. Those are your words. For the record, I don't care how forceful you think you are, nor how virtuous you think forcefulness makes you.
-
Gus, I'm not sure I should have to have the responsibility of interpreting your comments. I read what you wrote and pointed out to you that you lost me. Perhaps you should keep responsibility yourself for what you choose to write.
gggustafson wrote:
When discussions become heated (as this one has), I take caution to avoid ad hominem arguments. Insulting is an ad hominem argument. When an individual (in this case Chris) takes an action for selfish reasons, failing to consider the 10 million+ folks who supposedly use this site, then that is wrong and that individual needs to be taken down.
You lose me with statements just like this. Do you realize what you're saying in this statement? You think Chris needs to be 'taken down'? You presume to have the wisdom to conclude that? You say no defense of Chris is required, yet you clearly are attacking him - you just wrote he needs to be 'taken down'. Are you sure you're not intending insult? It sounds like in spite of your protests, you certainly do. I'm not even interpreting. Those are your words. For the record, I don't care how forceful you think you are, nor how virtuous you think forcefulness makes you.
I fully assume responsibility for what I wrote. I also stand by it. Yes, I think in this case Chris did wrong and needs to be taken down. No question! CP is no longer his toy (although I doubt that he ever considered it such). By doing what he did, he lessened the usefulness of a web site page, making the lower portion of the page unusable. That is inexcusable. I believe that you are now descending into semantics. But thank you for your comments.
Gus Gustafson
-
I fully assume responsibility for what I wrote. I also stand by it. Yes, I think in this case Chris did wrong and needs to be taken down. No question! CP is no longer his toy (although I doubt that he ever considered it such). By doing what he did, he lessened the usefulness of a web site page, making the lower portion of the page unusable. That is inexcusable. I believe that you are now descending into semantics. But thank you for your comments.
Gus Gustafson
gggustafson wrote:
I believe that you are now descending into semantics.
You're wrong.
-
-
Chris, don't be so touchy. You did the programming community a significant service. We have all benefitted from your hard work. I suggested that a current CP project was going to produce less-than-desired results. You didn't listen and unfortunately my prediction has been borne out by the quality of the submissions. My view is that CP is a great site. It does what its founder wanted it to do. But CP is taking off in a strange direction. Maybe you can rein it in. Anyway, thanks for the site.
Gus Gustafson
gggustafson wrote:
Chris, don't be so touchy
Neither Chris, nor his response to you, is touchy. That was an insulting statement.
-
gggustafson wrote:
That you would do it for personal reasons is immature and unprofessional!
Seriously? You think that this is a mature response from you? Insulting Chris. If you want to set a site that does exactly what you want, then start one yourself. I think that Chris is allowed a personal indulgence here considering how much work he's done for the community.
Well said, Pete.
-
I'm just going to say this... When I have a question, I post it and get responses almost immediately... When I want to research a topic, I search and (usually) find what I need almost immediately... If I have the time, I'll contribute occasionally... Everything just "works". I find the sight very helpful and easy to use, and when I have the opportunity I enjoy the company. Everything is well monitored. I've never had any issues with any of the features. I feel the aggressive nature of these posts toward Chris and the team is uncalled for. Frankly, the site is free, and I appreciate everything I have gotten from it over the past few years. If the team wishes to implement feature which make their lives easier... which ultimately makes our experience better... the I say go for it. Calling the team unprofessional is uncalled for, IMO. I'm extremely happy with the way things are, and have no complaints with either the site or the team running it. Just my 2 cents. -Bert
Well said, Bert
-
Well said, Bert
Thanks bud!
-
Mike, at no time have I ever intended insult. I intend discussion, no matter how heated. Your defense of Chris may be laudable but no defense is required. When discussions become heated (as this one has), I take caution to avoid ad hominem arguments. Insulting is an ad hominem argument. When an individual (in this case Chris) takes an action for selfish reasons, failing to consider the 10 million+ folks who supposedly use this site, then that is wrong and that individual needs to be taken down. Be careful how you interpret my comments. I hold CP, its founder, and its staff in the highest regards. I would not spend the time to write articles and answer member's questions if I did not. I have never questioned the intent of Chris or the CP staff except in the case of moving a page. However when something is amiss, I will make known the problem. In forensics (formal debate) I am not squeamish. And I do not plan to become squeamish! If you consider forcefulness as insulting then I fear the problem is with your definition, not with my assertiveness.
Gus Gustafson
In addition to Mike's statements, which I am aligned to... I can claim to be king of the lizard people... standing by that comment does nothing to prove it's validity. Further, you most certainly do not speak for all 10 million members, any more then I speak for the hundred bazillion lizard people. I get quite a bit of mileage from the articles, tips, and questions on this site... if Chris decided to rename it "Chris' Super Mega Awesome Website" and plaster his face on the top in lieu of Bob, I wouldn't care a bit... because I could still use it for what I want. It doesn't matter if Chris and the team are the drivers of this bus, as long as it gets us to our destination ! Plus, we have some pretty good company along the way. Now, if you have problems with ads corrupting the viability of the website's usage, forward screenshots and browser details to the team. I'm sure you'll find them responsive ! Bugs and suggs is for these issues. If you have issues with a particular article, flag it, or put it in bugs and suggs. Finally, please remember that the bugs and suggs page exists for the resolution of these issues. If they include a tool on that page which helps them resolve these issues in a faster manner - AND allows us to see their progress and "roadmap" - then what exactly is the problem here? Personally, I find it interesting to see what the team is up to, and it does not impact my ability to view that page. Admittedly, I don't submit any bugs, but I do visit from time to time, just to see what's up. Remember, we're all a community. We don't have to agree on everything ! But, if many people did not like the site, they wouldn't be here. -Bert
-
Not being touchy Gus, I'm trying to understand what Ads are blocking your navigation. [Edit: and I'm getting crossed wires here! You responded to my response from Brycey, and I'd like to hear his thoughts since I think his concerns are different from yours] With regards to the "Current CP Project" do you mean the HTML contest or The Guild?
cheers Chris Maunder
I had a similar experience whenI went to Waterfox 28.0, where ads begun showing up everywhere, and I mean even in my own web site. Apparently a new extension was added (do not recall full name but it had to do with ads). Removed it and issue went away. Next day, issue is back and so is the extension. Finally was able to return to sanity by turning "Update Add-ons automatically" off and removing the extension. And I mean everywhere, I (and my users) got popups in input fields! I wonder if this is what is happening to CP dotheads??
-
I fully assume responsibility for what I wrote. I also stand by it. Yes, I think in this case Chris did wrong and needs to be taken down. No question! CP is no longer his toy (although I doubt that he ever considered it such). By doing what he did, he lessened the usefulness of a web site page, making the lower portion of the page unusable. That is inexcusable. I believe that you are now descending into semantics. But thank you for your comments.
Gus Gustafson
x