In mode_image: shouldn't the board title be in <h1>, and the post headers in <h2>?
> 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
Did you ditch customizable capcodes?
How about placing the Formatting menu to the left or right of the "File: " field? I'd also like to see WakabaMark changed to its real name (Markdown).
A few other considerations:
Small details aside, this is seriously shaping up to be an amazing release. Your efforts are much appreciated, WAHa.
>>178
There will always be pranksters around. This is probably a good example on what matters to trust tripcoders more than anonymous contributors.
Trivia: Here is a list of 2ch kopipe to fool people into using fusianasan:
http://ansitu.xrea.jp/guidance/?fusianasan
>>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"?
Apparently it's not Japanese, because it's supposed to be pronounced as an English word. I have no clue, though.
>>216
I remember at least one or two boards on 2ch that used it, though I can't remember which (moon language and such, you see).
I apologize for the dumb question I made at the end of >>218. I forgot that Kareha permasages (not closes) a thread after the limit is exceeded, so there's no need for a hypothetical 1001th post anyway! orz
Well, that's what I've said from the start, but people keep requesting them.
FUDGE_BLOCKQUOTES is used by the Futaba style, and I guess I just want to keep it there to make it compatible with Futallaby-style CSS files.
> people like admins might prefer to use them
but they have capcodes now...
>>48-50
First of all, I don't believe it would make bumps more valuable in any way. People bump threads all the time with worthless replies since most don't even know what "sage" is or means or what it is good for. They will simply continue to do this, no matter whether the sage function is changed in this way.
Even at this stage, years after its introduction to a major western userbase, people are still clueless about the main basic functions of image- and discussionboards in the Futaba/0ch style. There are some signs of improvement, but they are rare.
I doubt people would be willing or eager to learn a new, different behaviour at this point in time.
The only real change is what >>50 points out (though I want to mention that even that point is mostly misunderstood: if people want to protest against a certain thread, they should post as many sage posts as it needs to get permasaged (although it's arguably counterproductive, considering the default prune behaviour of imgboards). If threads are still bumpable and trolls find that they have been flamed with a sage, they will just bump it once more). And I don't think that's enough to justify a pretty major function change.
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。
Text Art's description about auto-linking URLs and >> references is redundant. Not a bad solution with the layout, though (hiding the menu behind "More options..." still bugs me).
> 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.
> Can't this be somewhere else but the post form?
No, because that would be immensely useless and annoying, because nobody would know it's there, and even if they did, they'd have to go somewhere else every time they wanted to post something using a different markup.
>>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:
> 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.
Devil's advocate: What if they make significant changes you would want to add yourself? before you do? Can they then tell you to stop if they license their work first?
"When they shouldn't be?" They've always been bolded.