test1

Oops, here's the screenshot. orz

>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.

>>251

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 vote yes, but that is obvious isn't it?

I don't know if this is a bug or not, but could you change the Futaba template so that hovering over/clicking on a post header doesn't count as doing the same to the deletion checkbox next to it? Same goes for the "[File Only]" area at the bottom with its checkbox.

> some other trickery

I smell JavaScript coming in about >>90-120

> Maybe the thread title should be an l50 link?

That's what I've been saying in >>3!

> If anything, the role of capcodes should be minimized or altogether eradicated, in favor of ninja moderation.

It's up to the administration of the site how to use them. I am advocating that if they are used at all (and yes, there are useful instances for this and yes, these are and should be rare) then it would be helpful to be able to differentiate between site owner/admin/supermod/mod/maid/etc

> To more closely resemble the 2ch look, how about prefixing thread title headers in the main board page with a 【position:postcount】thingie?

I find the "1. Thread title (1000)" format much more readable in the post list. And for the main titles, I don't see any value is putting the position in there. That serves no discernable purpose.

> And as suggested before, the navigation links on the bottom of individual thread pages should include "Previous 100" (ie, all posts before the first post in the URL) and "Next 100" (ie, all posts after the last post in the URL).

They already do, but only if there are enough posts in the thread for this to make sense. Or, try a short range like 23-27 to see it in action.

> The "First 100" link should also be removed from the bottom of individual thread pages, and there should be a link to to thread-list included below the reply box of each previewed thread on the front page.

I've been wondering about the justifications for which navigation links should go where. 2ch has it pretty much worked out, I'm sure, but I don't quite see why there should be a "First 100" at the top but not at the bottom.

> Change "Del" links to widget buttons.

Would be very ugly. Those buttons are big.

> In order for the CSS selector not to take over the entire header, how about turning it into a drop-down menu?

I was meaning to do that from the start, but there was some problem with gettting it right. I forget what exactly.

> The same could be done with the Admin functions (appearing only after one correctly inputs the password), placing it on the right side of the board and thread title headers (this would also allow admins the convenience of deleting and permasaging threads from the front-page).

Squeeks would prefer to have a separate script for admining. I'm not sure which is the best approach here.

> and would something like this work (given that all boards share the same root directory)?
> >>>>sup/1129153864/1-100
> >>>1129153864/1-100

Maybe, but I don't see the value in adding code for this, given that you can just paste the URL in there.

> P.S. When you mentioned serving dynamic pages in >>46, were you referring to individual thread pages? As I mentioned before, it'd be nice to make the front page as dynamic and flexible as thread pages when it comes to viewing options (via PATH_INFO).

The front page gets lots of hits. This would drive up CPU usage something fierce.

> Oh, and please bring back MAX_LINES.

I still don't think it serves any useful purpose.

Should be fixed now.

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)?

What does "fusianasan" mean?

I've also had an idea swimming around: an option to only count actual thread bumps in MAX_RES (not "sage" posts). I think it would lead to making each bump more valuable so that people don't do so wastefully and unnecessarily.

> The "entire thread" link can easily be changes to link to the files in /res/ instead of going through the script, but that would make it somewhat less convenient when you want to consturct custom URLs, so I haven't done it.

A better solution would be to use mod_rewrite to rewrite all /kareha.pl/$number/ links to /res/$number.html
It schould be a lot faster then running the script and the links stay the same.

I've also had an idea swimming around: an option to only count actual thread bumps in MAX_RES (not "sage" posts). I think it would lead to making each bump more valuable so that people don't do so wastefully and unnecessarily.

>>161

>3) was about a string to trigger ID:Heaven, not a constant for the Heaven part (which is already configurable)

That's what I was referring to also in >>154 (S_NOID being the theoretical trigger string for ID:Heaven).

Concerning localization: there are certain compromises with input triggers that must be made in order to maintain interoperability with Japanese users coming from 2ch/Futaba. They're not going to care about a system where "sage" and "fusianasan" (in Roman too I'm guessing, can someone confirm this?) don't work in their respective fields. In effect, 2ch set a standard of usability that we need to follow if we want to build a bridge between both communities.

On the flipside, I think there should also be a secondary set of trigger strings that would be more coherent to Western users and universal to all Western boards. Making them configurable from site to site is really dumb, because it would create an unthinkable usability mess. With Shiichan's death, Kareha stands unrivaled, and setting these strings in stone would ingrain them in the culture like "sage" and "fusianasan" have been in Japan. Thinking very optimistically, if a Western BBS site should grow into something large enough for 2channers to strongly take notice of, they would pick up on these triggers and possibly make their own concessions to implement them in 0ch.

What they should be is yet to be determined. Unfortunately, they'll probably have to be pretty dull in comparison to the witty botanical references and word puns in 2ch and Futaba.

>>163

>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.

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.

>Huh?

He meant saging a thread just because a part of the actual e-mail address contains the word "sage."

Oh, and please bring back MAX_LINES.

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

It's also more markup when even the existing one isn't working as well as it should.

>>170
But my good man, sage means down.

> 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.

These are temporary problems because the webmasters of both sites are too stubborn to upgrade.

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.

> partition to kill secure tripcodes

signed

> add functionality for multiple uploads in one post.

I think this was decided against before.

>>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.

>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.

>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.

Hmm, looks like my ISP fails at keeping my IP secret.

Oh:

> 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"?

Yes, that's a great idea, which is why I've always done just that. You're thinking of 4chan.

the text

c < d

causes a <d> tag to be opened, which is not on the list, and therefore all the text until the next tag will be deleted. a better behavior in this case would be to just convert that < to &lt;. you even ought to do this for

a < b

too, despite the fact that b is a valid tag, because who the hell leaves the closing angle bracket out of their HTML tag?

creating the correct regexes for this is an exercise left to the reader.

> 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.