I've returned from the world of the dead, with old forgotten...suggestions! http://wakaba.c3.cx/sup/kareha.pl/1109447905/l50
>-Scaleable administration (ie, [variable permissions for different passwords])
>-Forcenick and/or force anon for [specified IPs]
>>91 Ohshi-, time paradox!
> 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
I've returned from the world of the dead, with old forgotten...suggestions! http://wakaba.c3.cx/sup/kareha.pl/1109447905/l50
>-Scaleable administration (ie, [variable permissions for different passwords])
>-Forcenick and/or force anon for [specified IPs]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Domain
It means anyone can do whatever they want with it. They can't claim copyright, though, since they didn't create it in the first place. 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.
> 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.
There's no obvious way to do this, since there has to be code that specifically checks a field and takes certain actions long before the template comes into play. It'd take some sort of plugin system to implement it, and I don't think that's quite called for.
Also >>154 is Kami.
> Also: I just noticed that "¦" in tripcodes will work correctly but turn into "�U" through the cookie on /soc/ but not on the sandbox.
This might have been worded a bit akwardly. What I meant was: Tricodes work fine with ¦ on both the sandbox and /soc/&/sup/, although the latter boards will strangely turn the ¦ into a U? after the reply button was hit.
>>236
I mean, thread titles in <h2> and post headers in <h3>.
> You don't see the link to the WakabaMark page either?
Nope... ?
> There's just a tiny little link there to let people do this. Is this really a such a huge bother to deal with? It's two words.
It's a link, it screams "Click me!". Most people don't need it most of the time, still it'll be there all of the time. How about style:none or something?
And sorry for being annoying. Strong opinions and all, no offense.
> Reintroduction of "Marked for deletion (old)"
I actually don't like that, and think wakaba should no longer use the futaba style of dropping threads by default. Why not use the least-popular option instead? If a thread is in demand, let it live.
Yeah, no, maybe. Using secure trips for capcodes also adds extra protections against accidentially misspellingyour capcode and leaving it open to attack.
test2. looks good!
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.
And this:
だってよ。
231 :ひろゆき ◆3SHRUNYAXA @どうやら管理人 ★:04/02/05 14:13 ID:???
ハンマー投げゲーム機能つけてみました。
名前の欄に『murofusianasan』と書き込めば
【60m】とか【75m】とか記録が出ます。
数値はランダムで0~100くらいまでありますよ。。。
お暇なら遊んでください。
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?
> 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.
> 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.
Nothing specific, just protecting against any possible future ones.
>>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:
>>220
I meant only using the extra post for autoclose situations where the thread has exceeded the defined postcount limit in config.pl. As for the implementation, couldn't you just have Kareha use post_stuff() and (somehow) replace the timestamp with "Over XXXX Thread"?
You can't document easter eggs! That's crazy talk!
Also, I find it insanely more annoying to write text in five-line tunnel vision than whatever annoyance might be caused by a comment box that expands.
>>9
I mentioned the option because on highly active boards it's helpful to know which threads will be gone in the next few minutes.
> statically linked executable
I have to disagree with this. It should run in perl too.
> 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.