TPFC Database
Re: TPFC Database
fucking hell
why you keep submitting to db without posting about it in the forum
is it so hard
nobody ever will ever know about your submission
why you keep submitting to db without posting about it in the forum
is it so hard
nobody ever will ever know about your submission
Re: TPFC Database
Yeah you caught something that I am also frustrated by. I'm working with Andrew on something for this and hopefully we'll have some resolution soon.
By way of background, the original point was to allow developers to come and add their programs to the database. It wasn't seen as an issue because they weren't public until voted on, but that may not be 100% correct, which is why it keeps happening.
Anyway, more to come.
---
EDIT: I've zapped any clear description of the EaseUS entries as the author obviously had no interest in actually going through the submission process. For the moment the PDF tool just had it's URLs removed.
By way of background, the original point was to allow developers to come and add their programs to the database. It wasn't seen as an issue because they weren't public until voted on, but that may not be 100% correct, which is why it keeps happening.
Anyway, more to come.
---
EDIT: I've zapped any clear description of the EaseUS entries as the author obviously had no interest in actually going through the submission process. For the moment the PDF tool just had it's URLs removed.
Re: TPFC Database
billon is right- the database is full of non-portable programs which do not belong to the database. There are also duplicates- people continue to add entries without checking the database, example:
I think that such duplicates should be deleted.
One more thing- usdcs is a moderator but he has been absent for more than 4 years. I suggest that billon should be granted moderation rights- his work on this website is amazing.
I think that such duplicates should be deleted.
One more thing- usdcs is a moderator but he has been absent for more than 4 years. I suggest that billon should be granted moderation rights- his work on this website is amazing.
Re: TPFC Database
I'm going to have to let Andrew respond to a lot of what you mentioned as that's his to decide, but the last time this came up (if memory serves), he indicated the duplicate entries weren't doing any harm and therefore could be left alone. Unless it's spam, I don't have an opinion.
I do agree that billon is doing excellent work on the site, and we're really lucky to have him.
I do agree that billon is doing excellent work on the site, and we're really lucky to have him.
- Andrew Lee
- Posts: 3072
- Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:19 am
- Contact:
Re: TPFC Database
How about this? I will add a batch job to automatically remove private entries that are more than 4 weeks old? That way, there will be ample time to make the entry public.webfork wrote:Yeah you caught something that I am also frustrated by. I'm working with Andrew on something for this and hopefully we'll have some resolution soon.
Note: Instead of deleting those entries permanently, I will simply move them to another table so that they can be restored manually if necessary. Just as a failsafe.
Another possible tweak is to make private entries only visible to logged in members. This means they won't appear in search engines, which should reduce the incentive to cheat?
@billion: are you ok with this suggestion?smaragdus wrote:One more thing- usdcs is a moderator but he has been absent for more than 4 years. I suggest that billon should be granted moderation rights- his work on this website is amazing.
webfork has also nominated Midas (again) as a moderator.
To make things easy, how about this? If I don't hear any objections (from either the nominees themselves or other members) by Friday, they will be granted mod rights this Saturday. Deal?
Re: TPFC Database
Sounds good to me. Search engine visibility may well be the most important reason to create spam entries.Andrew Lee wrote: ↑Mon May 07, 2018 8:53 pm Another possible tweak is to make private entries only visible to logged in members. This means they won't appear in search engines, which should reduce the incentive to cheat?
My YouTube channel | Release date of my 13th playlist: August 24, 2020
Re: TPFC Database
I like the second solution better, the first one is doubtful to me -- in the past, some entries were downgraded for a long while only to be restored later. Even when that doesn't happen, they perform significant history and documenting roles for the community.Andrew Lee wrote: ↑How about this? I will add a batch job to automatically remove private entries that are more than 4 weeks old? That way, there will be ample time to make the entry public.
Note: Instead of deleting those entries permanently, I will simply move them to another table so that they can be restored manually if necessary. Just as a failsafe.
Another possible tweak is to make private entries only visible to logged in members. This means they won't appear in search engines, which should reduce the incentive to cheat?
Oh, boy.Andrew Lee wrote: ↑To make things easy, how about this? If I don't hear any objections (from either the nominees themselves or other members) by Friday, they will be granted mod rights this Saturday. Deal?
- Andrew Lee
- Posts: 3072
- Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:19 am
- Contact:
Re: TPFC Database
OK, I have implemented the change so that private entries will only be visible to logged in users.
If you are not logged in and try to access any private entry, you will simply be redirected to the home page.
Now let's discuss the pros and cons of auto pruning older private entries.
I have another tweak to add to my first suggestion. Maybe we will only prune private entries created by R0 users (we can tweak the R paramater here), and leave the rest alone. Would that make it more palatable?
If you are not logged in and try to access any private entry, you will simply be redirected to the home page.
Now let's discuss the pros and cons of auto pruning older private entries.
I have another tweak to add to my first suggestion. Maybe we will only prune private entries created by R0 users (we can tweak the R paramater here), and leave the rest alone. Would that make it more palatable?
Re: TPFC Database
About Private Entries
==
About Moderators
I think that both (in alphabetical order) billon and Midas would be excellent moderators- throughout the years both of them have proven to be dedicated to this site. Of course webfork is doing excellent job but he may need helpers (for example many threads need merging).
==
Sometimes private entries need more time (months and even years) to become public. Also, database entries may be upvoted, then downvoted, then upvoted again. So for me removing private entries older than 4 weeks is not a good idea. I am sure that there are private entries buried deep into the database which worth becoming public. For example iPhotoDraw needed years to become public (mainly because the submission to the database was not announced in the forum and the users were not aware of the private database entry). I am thinking of a kind of notifications when new entries are added to the database, even some developers seem to be unaware that they need to announce their programs in the Portable Freeware Submission sub-forum. Or perhaps a database entry should not be accepted without forum announcement (Forum topic ID is required). For me the private entries are not a problem if they represent portable freeware programs. But I think that when non-portable programs and commercial programs are added to the database these private entries may be deleted.How about this? I will add a batch job to automatically remove private entries that are more than 4 weeks old? That way, there will be ample time to make the entry public.
Note: Instead of deleting those entries permanently, I will simply move them to another table so that they can be restored manually if necessary. Just as a failsafe.
Another possible tweak is to make private entries only visible to logged in members. This means they won't appear in search engines, which should reduce the incentive to cheat?
==
About Moderators
I think that both (in alphabetical order) billon and Midas would be excellent moderators- throughout the years both of them have proven to be dedicated to this site. Of course webfork is doing excellent job but he may need helpers (for example many threads need merging).
==
Re: TPFC Database
What did I miss? (Feel free to message me directly to avoid a thread hijack.)smaragdus wrote: ↑Tue May 08, 2018 4:23 am I think that both (in alphabetical order) billon and Midas would be excellent moderators- throughout the years both of them have proven to be dedicated to this site. Of course webfork is doing excellent job but he may need helpers (for example many threads need merging).
Re: TPFC Database
@webfork
No, you have not missed anything. I meant that 3 pairs of eyes see better than one.
No, you have not missed anything. I meant that 3 pairs of eyes see better than one.
Re: TPFC Database
The reason people are posting these entries is because it's showing up on search engines. As such, just making the private database available only to logged-in users would fix that. You could also limit the Add Program functionality to users with a few forum posts.Andrew Lee wrote:Another possible tweak is to make private entries only visible to logged in members. This means they won't appear in search engines, which should reduce the incentive to cheat?
I'm reluctant to delete old, private entries as there's always a chance (albeit small) that they might come back into development or use and get upvoted. Also you put a lot of time into those old posts so I don't want to toss them unless they're causing problems.
Re: TPFC Database
I agree with @billon and @smaragdus that a forum topic submission should be a requirement for database entry.