4 ms·

Hey wjvdhoek, I'm the guy working on this project. I agree mandatory registrations are indeed very annoying (and 95% of the time completely unnecessary). My rea

Hey wjvdhoek, I'm the guy working on this project. I agree mandatory registrations are indeed very annoying (and 95% of the time completely unnecessary). My reasoning behind requiring user registration is for security. Since code is being executed on my server, I want to be extra careful. That being said, you have an idea I never thought of. I could simply let any user make X number of attempts and then prompt for registration. It's not as annoying that way and still secure. And yes, it's definitely hurting conversion BUT I couldn't think of any other way to set things up. If anyone else has suggestions on this, I'm all ears!

happy-go-lucky 9y ago
Should users have any reputation before creating new challenges or making translations?
- Method-X 9y ago
  This would make for a great anti-spam mechanism. Kind of like the ultimate captcha. If quality / spam ever (inevitably) becomes an issue, I will absolutely require a minimum REP / XP.
  - happy-go-lucky 9y ago
    I asked the question because as of now it looks like any registered user can create new challenges and/or translations.
noxToken 9y ago
It is kind of soul crushing to work on a problem only to be denied execution. Thankfully, I ran an easy JS challenge that was a one-liner. Had I done a a harder challenge that took 10 or 20 minutes, I would have been rather upset. I understand why you put the registration further into the process. People have already invested time, so they might as well register so that the time isn't wasted. This is markedly different from how the rest are. They either put registration up front (HackerRank) or you're required to validate your own code (cryptopals). Aside from intentionally infecting my computer with malware or something, I couldn't think of a more negative user experience from a code challenge site. These types of sites are far from unique. They are basically a dime a dozen. But now my experience is, "Don't make the same mistake I did. It gives you an input field to submit a challenge, but it will not validate your answer until you register. Either register up front, or don't bother." Edit: This post was intended to be constructive, but I can see how it can be interpreted otherwise. See here[0] for more info. Apologies! [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14349780 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14349780
- PapaFragrant 9y ago
  This is a little bit overly dramatic.
- happy-go-lucky 9y ago
  > These types of sites are far from unique. They are basically a dime a dozen. That's not constructive criticism. You can't always create something that's unique and not a dime a dozen.
  - noxToken 9y ago
    It's not meant to be flippant, although I see I should have chosen better wording. It's meant to go right into the next point: I spent time solving a challenge, but the site will not let me validate it without creating an account. Sometimes the challenges take 30 seconds. Other times, you may spend over 30 minutes working on something more challenging. Who wants to spend time working on a challenge only to be told, "Wait a sec. You need to register before I tell you if you were correct." If I am presented with an input field, I would expect that I am allowed to submit that input. And that's where the dime a dozen comment comes from. If I try to accomplish the task your site has given me but there's an unexpected roadblock imposed by the site itself, why would I stay on that site when I can go elsewhere? If registration is required, it should say so up front. Allow users to browse challenges. Even allow users to view the full challenge text. However, disable the input field if they must register first. It otherwise implies that I can solve the challenge without an account. You don't want to mislead your potential users. I supposed I should have said something like, "There are many code challenge sites available. It is imperative to give users a positive experience, because users can easily go elsewhere for something similar." I did not mean to be insulting.
    - Method-X 9y ago
      What about putting a small banner / notice right above the code editor that explains the user must register before executing code? I'm honestly not intentionally trying to create an annoying site, it's just when you have users running code you legitimately have to take some security precautions. I'll put some thought into how I can communicate this to the user... My favorite idea so far is to just let the user execute code X number of times and then prompt for registration.
wjvdhoek 9y ago
The security-rationale is a fair point, haven't thought of that ;) Without knowing how you run the code server-side, are there any languages/challenges that are presumably safe? Maybe you could offer the Javascript challenges without the requiring the user to register.
zoidb 9y ago
"Since code is being executed on my server, I want to be extra careful." If you mean security I think your concern isn't necessary, if nothing else you will have less people using your site so whatever issues you do have will take longer to surface. If the concern is performance or loading your backend that may be valid but is also a great problem to have! I would try to get as many people to use it as possible OR at least make the first challenge or two available to anonymous users.
- Method-X 9y ago
  Also a really good suggestion. Thank you.

happy-go-lucky 9y ago

Should users have any reputation before creating new challenges or making translations?

Method-X 9y ago
This would make for a great anti-spam mechanism. Kind of like the ultimate captcha. If quality / spam ever (inevitably) becomes an issue, I will absolutely require a minimum REP / XP.
- happy-go-lucky 9y ago
  I asked the question because as of now it looks like any registered user can create new challenges and/or translations.

noxToken 9y ago

It is kind of soul crushing to work on a problem only to be denied execution. Thankfully, I ran an easy JS challenge that was a one-liner. Had I done a a harder challenge that took 10 or 20 minutes, I would have been rather upset. I understand why you put the registration further into the process. People have already invested time, so they might as well register so that the time isn't wasted. This is markedly different from how the rest are. They either put registration up front (HackerRank) or you're required to validate your own code (cryptopals). Aside from intentionally infecting my computer with malware or something, I couldn't think of a more negative user experience from a code challenge site. These types of sites are far from unique. They are basically a dime a dozen. But now my experience is, "Don't make the same mistake I did. It gives you an input field to submit a challenge, but it will not validate your answer until you register. Either register up front, or don't bother." Edit: This post was intended to be constructive, but I can see how it can be interpreted otherwise. See here[0] for more info. Apologies! [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14349780 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14349780

PapaFragrant 9y ago
This is a little bit overly dramatic.
happy-go-lucky 9y ago
> These types of sites are far from unique. They are basically a dime a dozen. That's not constructive criticism. You can't always create something that's unique and not a dime a dozen.
- noxToken 9y ago
  It's not meant to be flippant, although I see I should have chosen better wording. It's meant to go right into the next point: I spent time solving a challenge, but the site will not let me validate it without creating an account. Sometimes the challenges take 30 seconds. Other times, you may spend over 30 minutes working on something more challenging. Who wants to spend time working on a challenge only to be told, "Wait a sec. You need to register before I tell you if you were correct." If I am presented with an input field, I would expect that I am allowed to submit that input. And that's where the dime a dozen comment comes from. If I try to accomplish the task your site has given me but there's an unexpected roadblock imposed by the site itself, why would I stay on that site when I can go elsewhere? If registration is required, it should say so up front. Allow users to browse challenges. Even allow users to view the full challenge text. However, disable the input field if they must register first. It otherwise implies that I can solve the challenge without an account. You don't want to mislead your potential users. I supposed I should have said something like, "There are many code challenge sites available. It is imperative to give users a positive experience, because users can easily go elsewhere for something similar." I did not mean to be insulting.
  - Method-X 9y ago
    What about putting a small banner / notice right above the code editor that explains the user must register before executing code? I'm honestly not intentionally trying to create an annoying site, it's just when you have users running code you legitimately have to take some security precautions. I'll put some thought into how I can communicate this to the user... My favorite idea so far is to just let the user execute code X number of times and then prompt for registration.

wjvdhoek 9y ago

The security-rationale is a fair point, haven't thought of that ;) Without knowing how you run the code server-side, are there any languages/challenges that are presumably safe? Maybe you could offer the Javascript challenges without the requiring the user to register.

zoidb 9y ago

"Since code is being executed on my server, I want to be extra careful." If you mean security I think your concern isn't necessary, if nothing else you will have less people using your site so whatever issues you do have will take longer to surface. If the concern is performance or loading your backend that may be valid but is also a great problem to have! I would try to get as many people to use it as possible OR at least make the first challenge or two available to anonymous users.

Method-X 9y ago
Also a really good suggestion. Thank you.