>You need to explain what you're talking about before I can do anything about that.?
See attached screenshot. It's in every style but Pseud0ch.
>No. I'm too lazy to figure what that's supposed to do, and I don't think anybody actually wants to use that in the first place.
Well the functionality is already in kareha.pl, right? All you need is some modifications to the mode_message template. You can check out the 2ch-like boards on Futaba for reference, though I'm pretty sure I've seen other 2ch-like boards that implement multi-paged functionality with a different layout. Personally, it isn't all that big a deal if it's just a template issue though.
>There's no database to keep IP data in, and I'd prefer to keep the script completely agnostic to IP addresses.
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?
>No, because I don't know what you mean.
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?
>(optional) preview page
Excessive, methinks.
>Is there a reason why the post box is so small and pushed to the side?
Because mode_message is modeled after the 0ch layout. To compensate for the smallness, it expands automatically when you click inside it.
>Forced fusianasan would be fine I think, if they had advanced warning.
This can be easily done manually with rules.html
"When they shouldn't be?" They've always been bolded.
I'll sign that partition for a separate admin script and XHTML interface (one that includes the banning, board nuking, and spamlist-changing functions in Wakaba).
How about adding flexibility to the DELETE_FIRST option in config.pl, using booleans to define when to keep or remove a thread (including AND/OR/NOT arguments)?
Also, options for both automated permasaging and pruning by postcount, creation date/time, and board position (all configurable in config.pl of course).
Some other layout points:
>>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.
Kareha:
>>232
Nothing! But since mode_image's footer.html includes a link to Futaba called "Futaba mode," I think mode_message should have the same.
Ah, there was an XHTML error in the cutesy capcode, and of Safari won't handle XHTML correctly and die on errors. Gah. Fixed.
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!
About the etyomology of "fusianasan":
http://4-ch.net/nihongo/kareha.pl/1102656968/224-
A 1001th post would be a bother.
Also, for multiple board installations, use symlinks to allow you to keep just one installation of the main code files.
> the only boards that use them are image boards where you have to load images anyway.
Correction: http://www.akatsukimanga.com/kareha/
>>112
We already have the ID function, so why do we need such an egregious compromise of anonymity (and security) like voluntarily exposing your own IP?
I notice some weirdness with the CSS changes sometimes. For example, the first post on a -100 page will sometimes have the first character of the post enlarged. >>2 looks something like
\
/>2 until it is mouse-overed or you change the CSS, but then it goes back to large again on refresh. Also can happen with lowercase letters. Some of the field labels also change size from refreshing in a certain CSS versus just switching to it.
>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.
Why have a name field or link field? For the majority of posts they are not used, or only used for sage. As stated earlier, they are not even needed for the bare minimum of usage. You want to prove it is you posting? Use a gpg signature or something and a third-party extension, it is just fluff that is not needed at all!
I'm all for having a system that is easy to modify to the end-user's wants and needs. However, there are going to be plenty of users that are not hardcore enough to make or use such options. Therefore, the normal functionality should be pretty usable.
People seem to pop-up whenever something that would change the interface to shout it down. They seem to fear any change and normally give no reason other than it would clutter things up or some nonsense. Does the CSS selector -really- get in your way? It is probably a whole ten pixels! Is having the More options thing really ruining your experience, or are you just against it on some principle? Personally, I would move it below the comment text-area or something, as now the tab amounts between the main fields has changed.
Funky, works... I am pretty sure the error has something to do with the characters preceeding the "¦" in the unprocessed tripcode. It begins with a "`"
> He meant saging a thread just because a part of the actual e-mail address contains the word "sage."
> You know, like [email protected].
Well, then you are out of luck, aren't you? So you want to enter your E-Mail but cannot because then the post wouldn't bump then? Solution: Write it in the comment field, problem fixed.
There is no reason to change well-known keywords for this or even turn this into a frustratingly unconvenient tickbox/checkbox.
Kareha:
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!
On second thought, the whole search idea was pretty poor...but could you implement saging in a way that's independent of any particular post element, and is instead assigned in the individual templates?
> For example,
Different boards having different settings does not at all touch the question whether the learning curve of sage="does not bump thread" is low or not. It's up to the admins to tell their users what a particular modification on their board implies for "sage" - hopefully in a more responsible way than on 4chan.
> The error page in mode_message should more closely resemble that of 0ch (complete with "ERROR!" title).
Signed. And the style selector on the error page is pretty useless.
>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.
>database redesign
You mean requiring SQL software, or just making backwards-incompatible changes that would screw up old threads?
>prevent abuse
Are you only referring to flooding and spamming, or also trolls and flamewars?
Finally, out of curiosity: how much of the functionality in the .js file do you think could be properly implemented into a new or existing perl script?
>>> 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.
It does get in your way though, I enumerated cases where this is the case (albeit edge cases).
>>>Then just make one post with your name/trip and one with fusianasan and let your ID show up in both.
fusiansan is just intended for rare or special cases anyway, as is the whole subject of identification on anonymous message boards.
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).
>>>It's rarely needed anyway. Also, these things are pretty easy to remember. "sage" and "fusianasan" is all there is, really.
You spelled it fusiansan once.
Also, how is Kahera unrivaled when there are still large sites that are not running it? Shiichan is still on world4ch, Thorn on parts of wakachan for example.
http://wakaba.c3.cx/sup/kareha.pl/1127713568/l50 is also semi-relevant
> 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.
True, they're of limited usefulness, but people like admins might prefer to use them. And there are certain cases were you might use them temporarily for various purposes. I wrote the code already, so I might as well leave it in. It has some uses at least.
> 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.
I think I'm too lazy to do it. It's kind of hairy. Besides, as I said, you can remove a lot of the drawbacks of seprate installations by using symlinks.