I'm not sure I want to make a ban system. I'd rather just make it easy to interface with a simple banning script that does whatever's needed for the server it's running on.

> It would eliminate the concept of sageing as a protest entirely.

Except that nobody knows what's going on back-end.

I like the idea though.

> They can modify it an claim copyright on their modifications, at least as long as they're significant enough, but that doesn't affect existing works in the public domain.

Devil's advocate: What if they make significant changes you would want to add yourself? before you do? Can they then tell you to stop if they license their work first?

>>180

The one with encoded Javascript that makes you post with fusianasan is cute.

>>214

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

>>71
forgot to add that turning the CSS selector and Admin functions into drop-down menus and moving them to the right side of board and thread title headers would remove that top bar entirely on the front page.

>>196
Actually, a solution to >> links with static pages is to simply make them reference a certain point on a certain page number for that thread (ie, http://wakaba.c3.cx/sup/1129153864/index2.html#197).

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.

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)?

>>16

What browser are you using? I think I've tracked down the problem, and it's most likely a browser bug. The ancient Firebird (not fox, even) version I tested at work had the same bug (character set issues in the escape() and unescape() functions). It looks like your browser also doesn't follow the spec for how they are supposed to work.

>>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.

>>244

Er, that's a feature, not a bug. That's how most GUIs act.

Thanks. I did it the hard way and put in the proper transformations everywhere so filenames can be kept intact, though.

requesting features:

• >>n and >>q and anything else that can be used in the url.

• a "catalog" page for wakaba, like some futaba boards have.

>>313 Like lots of people use them anyway </sarcasm>. Yes, security is a good idea. What are the holes, anyway?

Thanks for the links at the top. Previously, I had to search for those threads over and over again if I wanted to find them.

>>137
I also noticed that you removed the CSS selector in individual thread views. Personally, it seems both the Admin options and Style selector are a bit of a hindrance to the overall layout. Don't get me wrong -- I think the drop-in Style capability is fantastic-- but it just doesn't seem to play nice with the current 2ch page design.

The thing is, don't most or all major browsers these days allow users to change CSS styles from within the application itself? I know Firefox does, at least. Maybe the selector isn't really necessary.

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.

>>183

No, that's just plain wrong. It is very much the job of the programmer to decide on such issues, and make sure they work consistently across boards.

Weird, ¦ now stays ¦.
Testing #¦ now.

> 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.

Oops, here's the screenshot. orz

> 2channel does not do this either by default. It can make browsing a bit more convenient (and I suspect dedicated 2channel browsers to insert & read these in some kind of standardized way) but I don't think that's reason enough to impose it on users by default.

whoops, I misread "postcount" as "posticon". Nevermind!

> 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?

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"?

>>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.

huh?

Ah, there was an XHTML error in the cutesy capcode, and of Safari won't handle XHTML correctly and die on errors. Gah. Fixed.