How about listing what dmpk2k or you have done already?
>>137
I'd advocate going for a separate interface a-la Wakaba, but it might be a bit too much to do for this release.
Also, maybe Easter Eggs like the Eternal September timestamp and others (if they exist) should be documented in config.pl.
Lastly, a question: who here finds enough use in the auto-expanding comment box to justify the annoyances when you click in or out of it?
PS: I always wanted to say this: The # anchors on the TiddlyWiki automatically scroll me (FF, 1.0.7) just below the actual text box of the entry. Is that a bug, a feature or... ?
Uh, kind of a bug. I really should fix it, but, lazy.
> statically linked executable
I have to disagree with this. It should run in perl too.
"When they shouldn't be?" They've always been bolded.
>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.
Uh, kind of a bug. I really should fix it, but, lazy.
>5) Seperation of sage et al from the email field to something else...
This is kinda what I had pushed for earlier in >>52. I think that separating the sage (aka, "don't bump"), fusianasan (aka, "show IP"), and ID:Heaven (aka, "no ID") functions from any particular post elements in the main scripts would be ideal for implementing Kareha in systems where inputting a certain string to trigger these functions is not intuitive (ie, every board outside of the 2ch/Futaba family). These trigger strings (S_DONTBUMP, S_SHOWIP, S_NOID) and their assignment to a certain form field input could be instead implemented individually in each template.
>2) Have the string to sage and fusianasan defined as a constant in config
>3) A specific string for ID:Heaven instead of anything in the email field
As I mentioned above, this would better work if they could be modified within each template in the list of string variable definitions.
>4) Cookie preferences such as "Don't use expanding textarea" which leaves it small or big.. or another option for that choice as well; an option to not save Name/Email automatically; anything else that is useful?
I like this one, as far as saving name and e-mail inputs go. I occasionally browse 4-ch at school, and it'd be nice for just an option to clear cookies when you're done and don't want anyone else to use your name, e-mail, and deletion password.
What the hell is RENZOKU?
P.S. >>151 is RMS
While we're on that note, can there be a config.pl option to toggle between opening file attachments in a new window or in the current window?
> The File field is almost never there.
...especially not when I've added a bug that makes it disappear. Where the hell did it go?
> 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.
Removed it when redesigning the page head, haven't figured out quite what to do about it yet. It needs to be changed, but to what, I'm not yet sure.
What about a(n) (optional) preview page? It would be nice, especially with the multiple formating options. It also allows most of the benefits of being able to edit posts, without being able to edit posts. I don't know how often I've screw up a quote because it didn't look like multiple lines but it was.
Is there a reason why the post box is so small and pushed to the side?
Forced fusianasan would be fine I think, if they had advanced warning.
The Futaba template is missing the "No File" checkbox next to the File field in the Post New Thread area.
∧∧
( ・ω・) It's late
_| ⊃/(___
/ └-(____/
∧∧
( ・ω・ ) Good night!
_| ⊃/(___
/ └-(____/
<⌒/ヽ-、___
/<_/____/
 ̄ ̄
>>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...
> The File field is almost never there.
...especially not when I've added a bug that makes it disappear. Where the hell did it go?
> 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.
Actually, no, the Javascript just strings some random numbers and letters together.
> Because it's one of the two requirements for creating a new thread, and it's a lot more important to have a well-defined topic than to fill in your name.
But the body text is even more important, and that goes at the bottom. So I dunno.
>It's more convenient if you want to start a new thread, but for those who don't it's one more form to have to scroll by.
Would it maybe make sense to make a separate thread creation page?
Maybe. I just picked something at random.
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?
>>108
I don't think that restricting specific users' posting priviliges is useful in any way except restricting them from posting.
>>108,113
"fusianasan" is for when a user wants to prove that he is posting from a certain place (like a school, a company's network or a military base).
>>112
A keyboard shortcut for "reply" in Kareha or "submit" in Wakaba would be nice to have.
Nothing specific, just protecting against any possible future ones.
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.
Apparently it's not Japanese, because it's supposed to be pronounced as an English word. I have no clue, though.