>>189

>The effect would be miniscule in comparison to the huge increase in bandwidth that would result from sending the entire static thread pages.

How about a config.pl parameter to split up thread subpages into X posts per page? The navigation links already use 100 posts per page for practically everything except "Last 50 posts".

Hmm, I just remembered: >> links would not work at all with static pages. Not good.

>Why? Even if 0ch or Futaba implemented secure tripcodes, you wouldn't get the same secure tripcode there as on another board. That's the nature of the security.

Right, I guess it was dumb to mention 0ch/Futaba in the first place. The point is, as you said yourself, tripcodes are a gimmick, and if someone wants to maintain a persistent identity across multiple boards and sites (ie, everyone here with a tripcode), they have no choice but to use ordinary tripcodes. Secure tripcodes are useless because they limit your identity to a single board, supposing each board/site's cipher key is different -- which it should be, since that's the point of having a secure tripcode in the first place. No one should be so paranoid about a tripcode that they'd need to have a different one per board/site.

>Not without doing a lot of changes throughout the code, and not without breaking current installations.

Shouldn't we sacrifice some backwards compatibility for a more robust and scalable design? It might even be possible to provide an upgrade.pl for old threads.

>>193

>You could only trigger the functions in a specific format, say...

That's a cool idea, though for now it would have to be left alone if we want to keep Kareha compatible with 2ch/Futaba conventions.

>>195
Exactly. The methods and the effects of saging a thread are separate subjects.

P.S. I recently discovered "rXX-XX" for threads in /soc/. How exactly does this work? From the sound of it, it's supposed to randomize the post order, but when I hit refresh I get the same order.

> Would it maybe make sense to make a separate thread creation page?

Considering that the ratio of users who start new threads to those who don't is pretty small on most message boards, I think it does.
A seperate page could also be used to put a more visible disclaimer/set of rules, as a seperate page with a different layout is likely to generate more attention from the user. Stuff that can be put there also wouldn't clutter up the frontpage.
I don't think this is an urgent matter, though.

> but when I hit refresh I get the same order.

Browser cache. Try shift-refresh.

It doesn't take a specific range, just >>r30 for 30 random posts.

I want a 1001th post! :(

Getting back to inconsequential nitpicking: I find the "___ image replies omitted" phrase to be a bit redundant, and for one it confuses me as to whether or not those image replies are separate from text-only replies. How about simply calling it "images"?

>>266

I told you to shift-reload!

>>348

That's a Firefox bug.

>>321
Wait, why should l50 links be indexed/cached? IMO the only links that should be on Google at all are main pages and "entire thread" links.

Some final points (I hope) before the whole thing is wrapped up:

• The CSS in the All threads page is unsightly. Is there a way to properly wrap the outer color border(s) around the table of threads?

• I still say that the "Navigation: " text is extraneous when people can clearly see what the links do. Also still partitioning for 0ch-style error pages (with displayed user host and all).

• Now that we do have filesize indicators in the backlog page of mode_message, do you still find it useless to have the red bold filesizes near the bottom of thread subpages?

• Does mode_message now work in PAGE_GENERATION => 'paged'?

• Idea: forced anonymous/sage/ID/fusianasan by IP/thread/board/whole site (some of these combinations already exist, I know)?

• Finally, I imagine that the permasage/close/delete functions in kareha.pl will be easily interchangeable among the conditions in post_stuff(). Can you confirm this?

>>55
I'm not complaining about the current system, just throwing around some new ideas for a change (instead of blindly following whatever new thing comes along on 2ch).

"page top" is better imho

> I don't understand the argument for OH NO ANOTHER BUTTON MY WHOLE LIFE IS RUINNED crowd

It's all a design & layout question. I'd like to have the interface reduced to what is absolutely neccessary, esp. since I do not think many people really want to even bother or bother very often with the whole markup question.

> The replacement will be an option to select the default markup for a board, which makes much more sense overall.

I agree, this seems to make the most sense. I understand the "More options..." will not be showing up on boards with fixed settings, so I'll shut my mouth from now on. Apologies to all who I've been bothering.

>>108
fusianasan is a voluntary function to show identity without having to memorize a tripcode. Works on all boards. Reveals your IP, of course...

Another feature I'd like is keyboard shortcuts like Wikipedia. Although you'd have to avoid stuff like Alt-D.

What does "fusianasan" mean?

> but I don't quite see why there should be a "First 100" at the top but not at the bottom.

Probably to avoid clutter and because of the assumption that if you arrive at the bottom of a page, you can do without the "First 100" link. "First 100" seems to be a navigational aid for beginners who are new to the thread, so it makes sense to only have it at the top.

How come this is now the by far biggest thread on this board?

Maybe it's because I'm posting useless replies like this one!

>>89

>But the body text is even more important, and that goes at the bottom. So I dunno.

Yeah, I considered this too. I'm mainly suggesting for the sake of convention.

We definitely don't need a separate page for creating new threads (I get bad memories of Shiichan), mainly because it's inconvenient and requires a whole other page for something that really shouldn't. The fact that it'd be at the bottom of the board page already detracts bad posters with itchy trigger fingers. I think most of us have an "End" key on our keyboards, so we don't really have to scroll all the way down anyway. :) Really, the only issue I have with moving the post box to the bottom is that it ruins my personal visualization of new threads falling on top of the "stack of threads" and replies emerging from below the "stack of replies".

In reference to >>90, there's something I see on every 2ch board that is a lot less prevalent in Western counterparts (barring certain 4-ch boards): a rules/disclaimer block at the top, above the thread-list, with links to a newbie guide, site FAQ, and the like. Yes, it may be an annoyance to veterans, but being at the very top means it's most visible to newbies. That way, we don't get a constant influx of people wondering whether or not they need to fill in the Name and Link fields and what the hell sage and tripcodes are.

> Another topic: since dynamic pages eat up CPU in order to rebuild pages according to URL parameters, what would be the likelihood of the current dynamic thread subpages having a significantly adverse effect in this aspect if a board were to grow to 2ch-sized proportions?

The effect would be miniscule in comparison to the huge increase in bandwidth that would result from sending the entire static thread pages.

The "entire thread" link can easily be changes to link to the files in /res/ instead of going through the script, but that would make it somewhat less convenient when you want to consturct custom URLs, so I haven't done it.

> Also, let's put out a partition to kill secure tripcodes (unless they originated from 0ch/Futaba)

Why? Even if 0ch or Futaba implemented secure tripcodes, you wouldn't get the same secure tripcode there as on another board. That's the nature of the security.

> captcha (until we find a way to implement similar functionality without requiring it in the form of a GIF/PNG image)

That's even more non-sensical. Nobody on the entire internet has figured out a reasonable way to implement captcha except by using images, and the only boards that use them are image boards where you have to load images anyway. And finally, they aren't just there to annoy you, people do actually try to flood boards, and they are stopped by the captcha.

> And is there any practical way that Kareha can be modified to run multiple (even nested) boards in a single installation?

Not without doing a lot of changes throughout the code, and not without breaking current installations.

Oh:

> Getting back to inconsequential nitpicking: I find the "___ image replies omitted" phrase to be a bit redundant, and for one it confuses me as to whether or not those image replies are separate from text-only replies. How about simply calling it "images"?

Yes, that's a great idea, which is why I've always done just that. You're thinking of 4chan.

Well, there are some issues to consider here:

• Hardly anybody needs to ever use fusianasan. It's a gimmick. Design decisions should not be made around it.
• The strings may be strange, and combining fields isn't the best design possible, but this is a 0ch clone, after all. If I were designing something from scratch, I'd do things differently, but as it is, people are expecting 0ch behaviour, and it would confuse them if the script worked like 0ch in some ways but not others.
• I might consider adding additional strings that trigger sage and fusianasan, but I'm not sure what they should be.

In the end, people actually enjoy the 0ch quirkiness. I know I do. I know about designing good interfaces, but there's something fun about an interface that is a little bit quirky, as long as it doesn't get in your way, and these things don't.

Okay then, for starters, how about the closing message to exactly look like a post (although it's sad it won't be accesable with >>1001)?

>>96
forgot to mention that maybe a parameter could be included in config.pl to define an XHTML file for the disclaimer/rules block. It could be used both in 2ch and Futaba (right under the posting area) modes.

Additionally, I'd like WakabaMark to be fixed somehow.
I don't know how, though. You know my resentments.

Finally, thanks for your fine work throughout all this time.
It is appreciated!

>>38
Sorry, I guess I should've worded that more clearly. I was referring to the ability for users to delete their own posts. It's counter-productive to discussions when a user deletes his own post and a quick replier later quotes or references it. It also encourages users to be lazy with posting, because they can always go back and hide their mistakes.

>>182
That's not what I meant. What I meant was: If people want to change keywords to something, let them figure out at appropriate places what this something should be. Whether it should be "down", "stay_down" or "stay_put" is not really a discussion belongs here, not at this point anyway.

I thought fusianasan was supposed to be a mod-only function to weed out bad posters. And what would be the difference between revealing the persons's IP and his ISP's domain?

>>99
I didn't mean to include Forcenick in there, sorry.
Adding to that, however, how about forced sage for specificed IPs? It'd make for a great slogan: Remember kids, tripcodes and aging are privileges, not rights!

Currently, pruning by age is measured from the time of the newest post in the thread, so it wouldn't really work. I'm not sure if this is the best behaviour or not, but it seems it makes more sense to kill threads nobody cares about than to kill slow-moving threads just because they get old.

All right, a beta version with some new features is now installed for this board. It implements a couple of bug fixes, and navigational and 2ch-style improvements suggested in this thread. Try it out, and complain about stuff that doesn't work or doesn't make sense.

I also put in customizable capcodes now. You can define a string of arbitary HTML for the capcode, so you can put whatever kind of fagginess you want in there! Hooray! Try this out by posting with #test.

The good old test thread is still here: http://wakaba.c3.cx/sup/kareha.pl/1099697376/

>>220
I meant only using the extra post for autoclose situations where the thread has exceeded the defined postcount limit in config.pl. As for the implementation, couldn't you just have Kareha use post_stuff() and (somehow) replace the timestamp with "Over XXXX Thread"?