>>321
Wait, why should l50 links be indexed/cached? IMO the only links that should be on Google at all are main pages and "entire thread" links.
Some final points (I hope) before the whole thing is wrapped up:
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!
How about appending an estimated (at the time of thread creation) time of pruning to the first post's header, if pruning-by-age is enabled?
>>54
I really don't understand what the problem with the current system is. You must be confused. ┐('~`;)┌
Well, there are some issues to consider here:
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.
> partition to kill secure tripcodes
signed
> add functionality for multiple uploads in one post.
I think this was decided against before.
Again, the list of tags allowed on that page don't correspond to what would be allowed in Kareha. Of course <img> tags wouldn't be allowed, for instance. This is just for testing the actual cleanup engine.
Congratulations to 82.94.251.206!
So the subject line will look like this:
[username]<><>[unix timestamp from now]<>[content of comment box]<> <>[IP]
About rel=nofollow: What links should have it? Obviously not the "entire thread" link, but the l50 links in the thread list sort of need it, otherwise the search engine will never find them in the first place. But that means the l50 links will end up in the index.
> 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
> You mean requiring SQL software, or just making backwards-incompatible changes that would screw up old threads?
I mean, needing to alter the table that is already in the database. I don't want to try to do that any more than I have to, as it's pretty hard to get right in a database-independent manner.
> Are you only referring to flooding and spamming, or also trolls and flamewars?
Yes, only flooding and spamming. Trolling and flamewars are not a problem one should use banning to try and solve.
> 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?
Well, if you serve up dynamic pages, you can do the form-filling on the server, but that's about it. The rest is dynamic stuff.
> Frankly, the combinations of many things into unrelated fields is a design flaw.
I don't think so, not in these cases. What's the alternative? Having a different field for fusianasan, a new checkbox for sage, etc.? That's just cluttering up the interface.
> What if you want to use a name/trip and fusianasan?
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.
> What if your email address contains the string 'sage'?
Huh?
> What if you want to sage a thread, but have an ID still?
Then the board has to be configurated to just do that (it already can).
> why should I have to remember something so foreign?
It's rarely needed anyway. Also, these things are pretty easy to remember. "sage" and "fusianasan" is all there is, really.
ugh "More options..."
too much clickable elements! and it doesn't even do anything (Firefox 1.0.7 here)!
out! out!
>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.
How about adding a link to 2ch in footer.html called "2ch mode"?
> 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.
Again, the list of tags allowed on that page don't correspond to what would be allowed in Kareha. Of course <img> tags wouldn't be allowed, for instance. This is just for testing the actual cleanup engine.
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.
I told you to shift-reload!
The "Entire thread" link on the thread page is missing a "/" at the end.