> Red, bold thread filesizes displayed near the bottom of subpages?

I support this, especially if thread-closing by filesize should be implemented.

>>180

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

>>360
Doesn't mean we can't have separate releases for special scripts. :)

Recapping, here are the things I'd like to see in the final release:

• better configuration of date and time (with optional timezone offsets), parsing certain characters for individual elements (ie, yyyy/MM/dd(D) hh:mm:ss -5:00:00) and also accepting numerical inputs for fixed dates and times (Eternal September)
• config.pl parameter to permasage after a certain thread filesize/total number of characters has been reached
• change the no-ID-on-email option to no-ID-on-sage
• no EMAIL_ID parameter (most if not everyone uses "Heaven" anyway, and if they really want to change it they can easily find the string in kareha.pl)

Some nitpicky template adjustments to mode_message in order to more closely resemble 0ch (see http://f17.aaa.livedoor.jp/~zerotest/jikken and http://0ch.mine.nu/jikken):

• multi-page links (1-, 101-, 201-, etc) at the top of subpages
• red, bold thread filesize indicator near the bottom of subpages
• "read all later posts" link just below the filesize indicator
• non-bolded post numbers
• colons before dates
• colons before names (thread subpages only)
• colons after thread position number in main page thread list
• smaller and (at least for Pseud0ch) black and bolded title in "Create new thread" box

So, I made the All threads page a lot fancier. Might need some shift-reloading to get the proper CSS.

Is this about done, besides the admin bit? I'm getting a bit tired and distractions are looming to the left and right.

>>89

>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.

test

> Pruning set to furthest-back instead of oldest.

I don't like this one. You just have to continually age a topic (until it hits the permasage treshold) in order for it so survive a long time. Normal users might have good reason to ignore simply it, though...

> Size limit instead of post number limit, maybe?

Sounds good.

> I was thinking of setting the default behaviour to never permasage or close threads.

I guess I don't have a strong opinion on this one. As long as the values will be customizable, I don't really care, I suppose.
Also: I just noticed that "¦" in tripcodes will work correctly but turn into "�U" through the cookie on /soc/ but not on the sandbox.

All right, new version installed. This one has a bunch of layout changes, and some big changes in the CSS, so you'll need to make sure the CSS is loaded by shift-reloading. Also, fixing all the CSS files was a huge pain in the ass. Have a look around to see if there are any obvious mistakes, but be gentle, because this has given me a headache.

Also, I couldn't be arsed to fix Amber, since it was just a joke in the first place.

> Put the Entire thread link on the top of the thread, not the bottom.

Well, since the current update has removed almost all links to entire threads, I won't do THAT, but I guess a Last 50 link could be snuck in somewhere... Maybe the thread title should be an l50 link?

That would be a bother too.

>>157
So the functions need to be hardcoded to a post element one way or another? If I wanted to, let's say, create a template for gazo-box or Shiichan (both use checkboxes for sage), I'd need to slightly modify kareha.pl to check that new checkbox input instead of the Link string input?

An interesting limitation. Thanks for explaining.

About permasaging/deleting after a certain thread filesize is reached: would this be the same as a limit on the total number of characters in a thread? Or would we also include WakabaMark formatting, hyperlinks (including navigation), name/date/title headers, reply boxes, and non-Unicode characters in the formula?

>>158
Chances are that most if not all major/fundamental changes made to Kareha's core scripts will clash with the philosophy of most people here (including WAHa), and they won't care for them anyway. There really aren't all that many big-bang end-user features left to be implemented in Kareha before it loses its minimalist charm.

P.S. Reminder for >>85

Also, wouldn't making capcodes even more prevalent be considered A Bad Thing®? If anything, the role of capcodes should be minimized or altogether eradicated, in favor of ninja moderation.

Another question: would FUDGE_BLOCKQUOTES be considered deprecated by now, or are there still CSS styles out there that require it?

0ch-PHP had this nifty feature where if it was a certain "high bandwidth" time of day, then you couldn't view the whole thread.

Hm... that is kind of useless on a worldwide forum, huh?

But there should still be an option to keep people from viewing more than 100-200 posts, as an emergency way of saving bandwidth.

>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.

>>327-328
All of this would be better handled by an external application. I think you are putting way too much work into user gimmicks as it is.

More options means putting more buttons, links, etc. into the interface. I am still bothered by the "More options...", but I am just a text purist (doing my fair share of AA, though) anyway, so meh meh... ( ´･ω･｀)

Weird, ¦ now stays ¦.
Testing #¦ now.

Oops, forgot to link the first point to my original thread: http://wakaba.c3.cx/sup/kareha.pl/1127326007

Oh, and see if dmpk2k is willing to port over the proxy detection and load-balancing/distributed server cluster functions to Kareha. Those would be neat.

> 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.

Suggestion / Request

Making "More options..." an option in the configs.

Seems sensible, when you already have the ability to turn off WakabaMark as a board admin. Also, it will make me stop whining (a bit).

> 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.

Uh, kind of a bug. I really should fix it, but, lazy.

> 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.

The "Entire thread" link in the top navigation bar of the thread page is still broken.

huh?

test

>>66-67

Noted and fixed in development version.

>>184
If people are going to decide to use custom names for paramaters, then there isn't much you can do about it anyway, or is there?

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?