> change the no-ID-on-email option to no-ID-on-sage
> multi-page links (1-, 101-, 201-, etc) at the top of subpages

Already implemented.

> config.pl parameter to permasage after a certain thread filesize/total number of characters has been reached

Isn't this essentially the same as saying "Please don't talk so much?"

> no EMAIL_ID parameter (most if not everyone uses "Heaven" anyway, and if they really want to change it they can easily find the string in kareha.pl)

The choice of this string is so weird and arbitary, I feel better keeping it as an option so that I can disclaim responsibility!

> better configuration of date and time (with optional timezone offsets), parsing certain characters for individual elements (ie, yyyy/MM/dd(D) hh:mm:ss -5:00:00) and also accepting numerical inputs for fixed dates and times (Eternal September)
> red, bold thread filesize indicator near the bottom of subpages

Pretty useless. I'd rather not waste work and code on something that has no actual use. (Timezone offsets would be useful, but this is such an incredibly hairy issue to get right, I don't want to even try. Just handling Daylight Savings Time would make my head explode, and I can't just leave it out, because then either the admin has to keep changing the offset, or the time will be wrong half the year anyway.)

> non-bolded post numbers
> colons before dates
> colons before names (thread subpages only)

what

>>123
signed

Suggestion / Request

Making "More options..." an option in the configs.

Seems sensible, when you already have the ability to turn off WakabaMark as a board admin. Also, it will make me stop whining (a bit).

Let's get to 1000 by "I want a pretty pony" only! ヽ(´ー｀)ノ

> (albeit edge cases)

Which is the crux of the matter - it mostly doesn't matter to the vast majority of users.

> You still end up with no way to link the fusianasan post with the name/trip one without IDs enabled (unless the ID method is known and no secret data is used).

You can use fusianasan with a tripcode, at least on Kareha. I suspect you can on 0ch too, but I haven't checked.

>>48

That is an interesting idea, and one that deserves some more thought.

>>333
The whole point of websites is to implement things without the external application. I don't understand the argument for OH NO ANOTHER BUTTON MY WHOLE LIFE IS RUINNED crowd. If you don't like the extra buttons why don't you remove them with an external application and/or preferences? When you are talking about formating options, a preview makes sense. Are you going to set up your thrid-party application for every configuration of tags supported for every board?

If a feature is of a wide enough audience, it should be included. I'm sure nearly everyone could use a preview every once in a while, whereas something like a Bible quotation functionality would not have wide use.

> You don't see the link to the WakabaMark page either?

Nope... ?

> There's just a tiny little link there to let people do this. Is this really a such a huge bother to deal with? It's two words.

It's a link, it screams "Click me!". Most people don't need it most of the time, still it'll be there all of the time. How about style:none or something?

And sorry for being annoying. Strong opinions and all, no offense.

>>123

Noted. I've been struggling with that same problem for naming things internally in the code, and obviously it distracted me from noticing the same problem in the GUI.

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)?

> Maybe the thread title should be an l50 link?

That's what I've been saying in >>3!

> If anything, the role of capcodes should be minimized or altogether eradicated, in favor of ninja moderation.

It's up to the administration of the site how to use them. I am advocating that if they are used at all (and yes, there are useful instances for this and yes, these are and should be rare) then it would be helpful to be able to differentiate between site owner/admin/supermod/mod/maid/etc

Let's get to 1000 by "I want a pretty pony" only! ヽ(´ー｀)ノ

> 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.

And my post ist a good example for chosing the wrong markup :/

>>214

Point taken. I'll add it as an autoclose option.

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)?

>>145

>does that mean you approve of removing the style selector on subpages?

I was referring to the entire board, but as you later explained, it seems it can never be removed completely. Though removing it from subpages wouldn't be a bad idea I guess.

>Kareha has no "No File" check in the first place

That's what I thought, but then why is it in the Reply pages?

Other: Have you considered multi-page links with intervals of 100 posts at the top of subpages (ie, 1-, 101-, 201-)? Red, bold thread filesizes displayed near the bottom of subpages?

Something else to consider: separating the board description/rules template from the board- or site-wide announcements. Check out http://0ch.mine.nu/test/read.cgi/jikken/1120050851 to see what I mean.

>>327-328
All of this would be better handled by an external application. I think you are putting way too much work into user gimmicks as it is.

More options means putting more buttons, links, etc. into the interface. I am still bothered by the "More options...", but I am just a text purist (doing my fair share of AA, though) anyway, so meh meh... ( ´･ω･｀)

Text Art's description about auto-linking URLs and >> references is redundant. Not a bad solution with the layout, though (hiding the menu behind "More options..." still bugs me).

test

I don't see what's so bad about >>330. The alternative is to force the table to be full width, which will make it uglier (because in HTML all columns will become wider, including the skinniest ones), and harder to read.

> No need for a database, just a text file. You're right about storing IPs, though, but then how can you implement a banning system? Do you use an encrypted IP like the algorithm to generate ID codes?

Banning is done through Apache, which really makes more sense than doing it in the script. I don't want to re-invent the wheel for that.

> I mean that (for example) if I wanted to replace the permasaging function under the MAX_POSTS condition (permasage after X posts) with the thread-closing function (close after X posts), all it would require is a simple replacement of the proper function references in post_stuff(), correct?

No, they're done at different different places, because they are essentially different functions. The permasage behaviour doesn't actually permasage a thread, it only refrains from bumping it. There's no permsage flag added to the thread. The closing, on the other hand, does add a flag to the thread.

> Making "More options..." an option in the configs.
> Seems sensible, when you already have the ability to turn off WakabaMark as a board admin.

No. And I actually removed the DISABLE_WAKABAMARK option since it's no longer really needed. The replacement will be an option to select the default markup for a board, which makes much more sense overall.

> Thorough search functionality a-la notchan, using PATH_INFO. This might not be possible without implementing a per-post metadata system though.

I think this not something that needs to be part of the software itself.
Besides, Google mostly provides that function just fine with site:blahblahblah.com blah

Also, what is "user deletion"?

I hate that blue link next to the reply box! It looks ugly!

Also, there's no "Less options..."

Can't this be somewhere else but the post form?

>considering the default prune behaviour of imgboards

One of the parameters Kareha uses to determine pruning is MAX_POSTS, so even if you sage a thread under this new condition, you still add to the board's total postcount and speed up the process for pruning that thread, regardless of MAX_RES. The only flew is this assumes pruning is based on thread creation date, not popularity (because someone could easily bump a shitty thread and save it from deletion).

I also agree that enabling this functionality would further make threads vulnerable to intentional bumping by trolls. I was sorta envisioning it being used in a mature community where trolling is minimal and quickly weeded out by regulars.

Here's a new idea: how about trying this in reverse? Only "sage" posts are counted in MAX_RES, in which case saging can again be used either in protest or as a courtesy to others. The only problem is that people can then freely bump threads without consequence.

Plus if you were to allow those tags in HTML, you should do the same for WakabaMark (which actually takes its cue from Markdown, so I don't see why it has a different name).

> Also: I just noticed that "¦" in tripcodes will work correctly but turn into "�U" through the cookie on /soc/ but not on the sandbox.

This might have been worded a bit akwardly. What I meant was: Tricodes work fine with ¦ on both the sandbox and /soc/&/sup/, although the latter boards will strangely turn the ¦ into a U? after the reply button was hit.

>>177

> It's not worth comparing until it doesn't break regularly.

The only problem with it is that it doesn't do paranoid file writes. The fact that the entire server occasionally breaks isn't related to how broken the script itself is.