| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 10:02 |
jperras |
exactly |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:59 |
_nate_ |
this is a Bad Thing |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:59 |
_nate_ |
the thoroughness of your validation actually changes from platform to platform |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:59 |
ADmad |
grr... |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:59 |
_nate_ |
ADmad: because then you get inconsistent validation results |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:58 |
ADmad |
dont see why majority have to suffer for a small minority who use windoze |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:57 |
ADmad |
jperras: regarding the e-mail validation ticket you closed, why cant be simple use "function_exists" and use getmxrr if available ? |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:54 |
alkemann |
laters |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:54 |
alkemann |
well i gotta go do something as antigeek as going to the gym to work out.. /sigh |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:53 |
ADmad |
yeah |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:52 |
alkemann |
wobbly bits? |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:49 |
alkemann |
poof |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:48 |
ADmad |
its give no more info than what api already does |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:48 |
ADmad |
this crap should be definately deleted http://bakery.cakephp.org/articles/view/filling-a-select-with-tree-behavoir |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:47 |
alkemann |
i havent looked at existing articles, but if ur opening that door jperras... ;) |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:47 |
ADmad |
so i sort of like the idea of markers but i am not entirely sold... would be nice maybe as a feature enhancement on a later date |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:47 |
ADmad |
) |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:46 |
alkemann |
i gave improvement feedback on 3 and published 2 :) |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:45 |
ADmad |
hehe.. dont get too trigger happy :P |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:45 |
alkemann |
moved a few from the "pending" to "deleted" today ;) |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:45 |
ADmad |
ACTION claps |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:44 |
alkemann |
ADmad: also im a moderator of current bakery now |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:44 |
jperras |
started with a few yesterday |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:44 |
alkemann |
so this moderation tool is a concept motivated by the wish to increase quality |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:44 |
ADmad |
*hear |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:44 |
ADmad |
nice to year |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:44 |
jperras |
fyi, I'm going on a retro-active bakery 1.0 article purge. all those unworthy will be given the chance to improve their codez, or will be unpublished. |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:43 |
alkemann |
yes |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:43 |
ADmad |
err the earlier statement isnt well formed but i think you get the idea |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:42 |
ADmad |
so the lowering of bar is taken care of |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:42 |
ADmad |
the reason articles of unacceptable quality is a single moderation approves which wont be the case in 2.0... so even if say you hold very high standards and vote 2 for it others might vote 4 and its published :) |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:40 |
alkemann |
it can tie in to the social aspekt of community owned article nicely |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:39 |
alkemann |
yes, but this added feature is a result of the wishes of .. well having a lower bar than what you and I might want for authors contribution, but also making an effort to increase quality |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:38 |
ADmad |
*so if it |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:38 |
ADmad |
plus we already have a system of an article getting particular amounts of votes to get published... so i it isnt good enough i wouldnt vote for it any way |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:37 |
alkemann |
i agree, but.. |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:37 |
ADmad |
ok.. personally i would prefer a article to be improved to an acceptable level and then simply published.. many times the avg. reader isnt smart enough to properly interpret the markers.. |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:35 |
alkemann |
thats a use case. lets say an article has valuable ideas, but the author hasnt expressed them well or implemented it good. it could be published as inspiration to others, but marked properly so people doesnt take it as canon |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:33 |
ADmad |
alkemann: so a not so nice article is published but with markers for users to see |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:32 |
ADmad |
hmmm |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:32 |
alkemann |
with broader uses and implications |