meta user
network profile
| bio | website | alertfalse.com |
|---|---|---|
| location | Mandaluyong, Philippines | |
| age | 37 | |
| visits | member for | 10 months |
| seen | 2 days ago | |
| stats | profile views | 5 |
I'm a community manager for Stack Exchange, following two years of service as a community elected moderator on Stack Overflow. Beyond that, I'm:
- A Husband and dad
- A Competent programmer
- A World traveler
- Not a teapot, and I have proof!
The usual links:
@tinkertim | My CV | My Blog
|
Feb 6 |
comment |
How can users be prevented from pouring water into the bean compartment of a coffee machine? I like the idea of making a container that can not logically be meant for water, but doesn't lend to the beans deteriorating in quality due to open air. Give the user a lever or something to close it off after refilling with beans for ease of inversion and placement back into the machine. Don't like vendor lock in. Up voted, since the mechanics described here are a very practical way to solve the problem. |
|
Nov 30 |
comment |
Axure Checkbox Interactions, 3 Cases: None Checked, 1 Checked, or 2+ Checked? @JohnGB This would not be a good fit on Stack Overflow, there's no implementation to speak of. Speaking as a mod on StackOverflow myself, It would be quickly closed as non constructive. |
|
Nov 8 |
awarded | Nice Answer |
|
Nov 3 |
awarded | Teacher |
|
Nov 3 |
answered | Deliberately annoying users to discourage certain behaviour. Is this a bad idea? |
|
Aug 15 |
comment |
How can you indicate a hidden button on the back of a device? I've actually returned devices that I later learned probably actually worked due to not reading 'quick start' guides. If I can't figure out how to do the most simple yet essential things with something (e.g. turn it on), it's going back to where I bought it. That being said, this is a really good answer as sometimes you just have to deal with a really bad design decision you can't change in something you're shipping. |
|
Jul 4 |
awarded | Scholar |
|
Jul 4 |
accepted | Given CSRF protection, how can I deal with an extremely slow user? |
|
Jul 4 |
comment |
Given CSRF protection, how can I deal with an extremely slow user? I'm going with this, as it is the least Rube Goldbergish way of doing things. I'm taking @dnbrv's fine suggestion of a 'Login permission cookie' error if for some reason the AJAX request fails (user lost Internet during their absence), at which point I hide the form and tell them they should refresh. |
|
Jul 4 |
comment |
Given CSRF protection, how can I deal with an extremely slow user? That would work, however it would require a bit of monkeying around in the core of the framework. The security class is loaded very early on (Codeigniter) , and will halt completely when this is encountered. +1 however as something like what you describe would be the cleanest and most unobtrusive way of dealing with it. |
|
Jul 4 |
awarded | Supporter |
|
Jul 4 |
comment |
Given CSRF protection, how can I deal with an extremely slow user? "Login permission" is definitely a winner. I was at a loss for a more friendly name. I was thinking "Security token", but some people panic when any kind of notice containing "security" appears. |
|
Jul 4 |
awarded | Student |
|
Jul 4 |
asked | Given CSRF protection, how can I deal with an extremely slow user? |
|
Jul 4 |
awarded | Autobiographer |
