> Also, I couldn't be arsed to fix Amber, since it was just a joke in the first place.

Booo!

> who here finds enough use in the auto-expanding comment box to justify the annoyances when you click in or out of it?

I love that feature. Please don't remove it!

> I think the drop-in Style capability is fantastic-- but it just doesn't seem to play nice with the current 2ch page design.

plz 2 be keeping that feature too

Damn, I was about to plug >>96 when I saw you uploaded the new version. Thanks for listening WAHa, you're awesome. :D

(Does this work like rules.html in mode_image? Is the board title inserted automatically in templates.pl or is it part of that separate html file?)

Already a few nitpicks though: (1) index.html#menu and index.html#1 links should be automatically inserted to the right of the board title (or below if you're looking at it without CSS), and (2) the "Create new thread" title isn't really necessary, since the widget button already explains its function (like with the reply box).

Unrelated: in 2ch thread lists, position numbers are followed by colons, not periods.

GDLib for thumbnails: http://wakaba.c3.cx/sup/kareha.pl/1113869490/5

Copyright only applies to the literal code, not to features, ideas, or algorithm. Patents do, to some extent, but that's not the issue here. Since I'm not going to write the exact same code, there's little they can do.

>>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･｀)

Tell me more about these pre-compiled binaries. I thought that was impractical...I mean, instruction set differences and so on.

Also, wouldn't making capcodes even more prevalent be considered A Bad Thing®? If anything, the role of capcodes should be minimized or altogether eradicated, in favor of ninja moderation.

Another question: would FUDGE_BLOCKQUOTES be considered deprecated by now, or are there still CSS styles out there that require it?

(Lots of stuff in here, click "whole post"!)

> How about listing what dmpk2k or you have done already?

Truth be told, I haven't even looked over his contributions yet. I'm doing some work on Kareha first. He did bandwidth load balancing for Wakaba across several servers, and image file archiving, at least. Plus some proxy checking and other goodies.

> Split threads and posts into separate tables. You're repeating the lasthit and parent column over and over.

Bad idea. Adds a lot of code complexity without adding any new functionality. The current solution is simple and robust.

> Automatic closing and moving of threads that do not get any activity in a certain timeframe (based on average activity frequency of the board)

This is nearly impossible to get right, and I don't think I'm going to try unless someone can think up a reliable algorithm that uses the data that is availble (not much).

> Reintroduction of "Marked for deletion (old)" (it's just handy to have that)

I tried several times, and concluded it wasn't worth the code and database overhead it would take. This feature is relatively easy to implement for Futaba-style post number limited boards (and Futaba implements it really stupidly), but it gets tricky when you have different deletion modes and want to do it right.

> Prune-limit mode that is defined by number of files or size sum of files on a board

Size limit is already implemented. I might add file limit, but I'm not sure it's all that useful, when you already have the size limit.

The rest, I agree with, and I will try to get most of it done. I'm sure there's some more stuff hidden in old threads, though!

> More information on the all threads page, date of the last post? file size?

That might be somewhat useful, I suppose. I'll have a look at it.

> A quote button that puts >>n and puts the post prefixed by > in the reply box

There's already a way to put in >>n. However, quoting an entire post is seldom something you want to do anyway, so I don't think that's worth cluttering up the page with a million buttons for.

> Different secret strings for different functions (e.g. one for ID generation and one for secure tripcodes)

Most admins probably don't get point of the secret string anyway, and asking them to put in several is just too annoying. In retrospect, I'd like to add a second layer of hashing to these, but that'd mean breaking secure trips AGAIN.

> A trigger for turning wakabamark off and one for forcing a monospace font

I've been trying to work out a more elegant solution for this.

I have always found that it's more difficult than one would think to implement features that will measure "popularity" in a satisfying way that isn't open to abuse in one way or another.

> Making them configurable from site to site is really dumb, because it would create an unthinkable usability mess.

Why? Let people figure out things themselves, if they are so keen on changing their keywords. They can get together in their own webmaster threads and figure this out. I don't see why this should be solved here.
Of course I think this is a dumb idea in the first place. Nobody needs to know what fusianasan and sage are. Write a FAQ with two sentences about it and/or let your oldtime users tell newbies. Two frickin' words, and you people talk about it as if it were something like making up a new system of romanization!

> Then why not simply boil it all down to the comment field, with trigger strings for inputting the name, e-mail, sage, ID:Heaven, and fusianasan? You can get a lot more minimal with the current interface.

That's a bit too much. You want to talk about sage and fusianasan in the comment field, not trigger it with it.
I suspect you are joking here, though. Design is about what you can take away and still remain optimal conveniency/efficiency on the user part, not about taking as much away as you are technically capable of.

　　　∧∧
　　（　 ･ω･） 　 　It's late
　 ＿|　⊃／(＿＿_
／　└-(＿＿＿_／

　　　∧∧
　　（ ･ω･ ） 　 　Good night!
　 ＿|　⊃／(＿＿_
／　└-(＿＿＿_／

　 ＜⌒／ヽ-、_＿_
／＜_/＿＿＿＿／
￣￣

Congratulations to 82.94.251.206!
So the subject line will look like this:
[username]<><>[unix timestamp from now]<>[content of comment box]<> <>[IP]

> 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"?

Also, I'd like to ask exactly how Kareha does automatically generates deletion passwords. I'm guessing it's similar if not identical to how it creates ID session codes with a user's IP.

>>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.

About the etyomology of "fusianasan":
http://4-ch.net/nihongo/kareha.pl/1102656968/224-

> forced fusianasan

that seems kind of evil.

>>32

Your browser momentarily regressed to an old bug and then got better? Who can tell?

>>22

Running in pure perl would be ideal, portability-wise, but in practice implementing a JPEG loader and saver from scratch in Perl is both a lot more work than anyone wants to do, and the result will also be too slow.

As was already stated, making a statically linked executable lets you distribute pre-compiled binaries that people can just upload along with the script.

>>184
If people are going to decide to use custom names for paramaters, then there isn't much you can do about it anyway, or is there?

>>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).

Forgot this one:
The general functions of imageboards do not seem to be clear to most people that eventually come around, the influx of total newbies is still big. Many neither know what sage is, how to properly reply to threads, what tripcodes are, etc.
Because of that, I believe it would be good to include a default link at the bottom of the unordered list at the bottom of the new thread form that links to http://wakaba.c3.cx/docs/docs.html#UsersGuide

Relevant:
http://dis.iichan.net/idc/kareha.pl/1128824710/12-

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!

>>151 It's all public domain, I believe.

Oh okay.

I agree, for Kareha at least.

> 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.

>>323-324
The 2channel moderation request forms that are mods of 0ch use 強制リモホ, which is Forced_Remote_Host, more or less. And it makes sense, there.

Forced_IP is only enabled on the "Siberia super-news flash" board: http://etc3.2ch.net/siberia/

And I have no idea what that board is about...

>Most admins probably don't get point of the secret string anyway, and asking them to put in several is just too annoying. In retrospect, I'd like to add a second layer of hashing to these, but that'd mean breaking secure trips AGAIN.

You could take the route that MrVB (I think?) did and generate the strings on first run? openssl, /dev/random, perl's random as last resort. In almost every case you are going to get a better random string than most people will supply, and if they want to change it they can. Or only have them generated if they are not supplied.

Honestly, when people care so much about anonymity they can put up with the changes required to ensure it.