No, if you ban yourself, you can't lift it (nm)

Subject: No, if you ban yourself, you can't lift it (nm)
Author: Tomash
Posted on: 2015-09-17 14:07:00 UTC

Jump to this post's position in the thread ↴

T-Board changelog by Tomash on 2015-09-17 00:53:00 UTC Reply

T-Board, the prototype replacement Board system, has been polished up a bit. It's now in a state where'd I'd be willing to spin up an actual test instance.

Updated to Rails 4.2 and Bootstrap 3 (aka, technical mumbo-jumbo)

Added spoiler tags (Nameless Admin, the CSS for those can be found here and is portable. If added, the syntax would be <a href="#s" title="Text to be hidden">Spoiler text</a>)

Removed the "Author (posted by Real Username)" thing. Instead, if you click on the author's name when looking at a post, you get taken to their user page, which shows their real username and email. This seems like a better approximation to the quasi-anonymity of this Board than the old system

Old bugs fixed, new ones inevitably introduced. Bug reports and other feedback welcome

P.S. Search doesn't work because of limitations of our hosting provider.

Expand this post →

Question about T-Board by the Irish Samurai on 2015-09-24 09:04:00 UTC Reply

Not sure if this has come up before, but how many posts is T-Board capable of holding before old ones get deleted?

I'm sure that when I joined the PPC this current Board held posts from several years back, now it only seems to go back about 2 years. We still have the archives, but they're a lot harder to read than the Board.

So if we did start using T-Board, how far back would the board records go? I'm assuming it would be a case of 'total number of posts' rather than time thing (i.e. once a thread is over 2 years old it gets deleted).

- Irish

Expand this post →

Storage limits by Tomash on 2015-09-24 15:21:00 UTC Reply

The main limits are
- Disk space (all the posts in the archive are around 50 MB, IIRC)
- The machine integer (since every post needs a unique ID). This is either 2³¹-1 or 2⁶³-1, both of which are really huge numbers. (I'd have to look up how big the post IDs are)
- The place I'm hosting now (because it's free) has a 10k database row limit, which is pretty low. If we put the Board somewhere less annoying, this won't apply.

Also, the awkward spreadsheets are just one representation of the archives. Their canonical form is a not very human readable data dump that's meant to be imported into a T-Board installation. (The T-Board code has scripts for creating these dumps, importing them, and making .csv files out of them)

Expand this post →
For reference: by Huinesoron on 2015-09-24 09:15:00 UTC Reply

The Board (and the Other Board) get 25,000 messages each. This was always the case; YWA were just very bad at archiving. (The previous cut-off was October 2008, which was when they changes names(?) from Server.com.)

hS

Random... bug? Fact? by Tira on 2015-09-17 23:54:00 UTC Reply

So you can't scroll up and down the T-Board using the arrow keys. Is this intentional or not? I can't think of a particular reason why it would be. On the other hand, I'm not sure there's going to be a way to fix it.

It's the sort of thing that's not going to bother the vast majority of the userbase, but will be extremely irritating to the few that it actually affects. I wouldn't make it a priority or anything, but if it's a quick fix, I'd appreciate it.

Cannot reproduce by Tomash on 2015-09-17 23:59:00 UTC Reply

Browser + OS + anything relevant, please?

I can use arrow keys to scroll up and down on Firefox 40 on Ubuntu Linux.

Hmm... Neither can I. by Tira on 2015-09-18 00:13:00 UTC Reply

So it was probably my computer deciding to be dumb, then, not an issue with the board.
It's working fine for me. by Iximaz on 2015-09-18 00:09:00 UTC Reply

Chrome and OSX, if that's relevant.

Already left some comments on the T-Board. by Iximaz on 2015-09-17 13:35:00 UTC Reply

Lemme copy them here...

Every time I want to view something under the poofed thread, I get a warning notice that I'm about to view a poofed thread pop up. Every. Single. Time.

Oh, you said you needed a ban test?

*holds out arms and paints a target on her chest*

...So using asterisks around text italicizes? That also bothers me. :P

Expand this post →

Re: coments by Tomash on 2015-09-17 14:05:00 UTC Reply
- I can see how that thing would get annoying. I think it would be a one or two line change to make it only appear on the actual bad post. I'll get to it sometime later today, I think.
  
  - I'll let hS test out that aspect of the mod flag.
  
  - Yep. Markdown. Same formatting lots of websites use. Makes it so you don't have to screw around with HTML. For actual stars, put a backslash in front (that's this one \ )

Change to poofing is in by Tomash on 2015-09-17 15:07:00 UTC Reply

It's probably better this way.

Consider yourself banned. by Huinesoron on 2015-09-17 14:01:00 UTC Reply

If you can poke it in the next hour and see what exactly happens, that'd be great.

Then I'm going to ban myself and see whether I'm allowed to lift it. Where's my head-spinning smiley?

hS

No, if you ban yourself, you can't lift it (nm) by Tomash on 2015-09-17 14:07:00 UTC Reply

That looks breakable. by Huinesoron on 2015-09-17 14:14:00 UTC Reply

From what I can see, the 'ban' actually just logs you out and throws up a big 'you're banned' message. Is there really no way for a user to force their login to stick?

hS

The ban is checked every time that by Tomash on 2015-09-17 14:24:00 UTC Reply

you try to:

a) Create, edit, preview, etc. a post

b) Look at a user page (and maybe access some of the more obscure corners of the registration system, like a password reset)

c) Watch/unwatch a thread

d) Do anything ban-related (except see the page informing you of your ban)

Apparently, there's a way to hook bans into the fabric of the user account. I'd have to figure out how to do that.

Expand this post →

Aright, when I went to reply to your post... by Iximaz on 2015-09-17 14:04:00 UTC Reply

I had to log back in, whereupon I promptly got the following message:

403 - You're Banned!
The user Iximaz is banned. The reason for this ban is: "She's a filthy swine". This ban will last until 2015-09-17 13:59:56 UTC, that is, for about 1 hour more.

If you believe you've been banned in error, please contact the Board admin.

BAN EVASION WILL RESULT IN A LONGER BAN.

I'll have you know pigs are actually some of the cleanest animals in the barnyard, thank you very much! :P

Expand this post →

You're unbanned. by Huinesoron on 2015-09-17 14:11:00 UTC Reply

Probably. Go check.

hS

Done and done. by Iximaz on 2015-09-17 14:17:00 UTC Reply

I did notice another thing. I clicked the box that said 'Remember me' but I still have to log in every time I close out of the tab. Might be something to look into.

Further comments: by Huinesoron on 2015-09-17 12:49:00 UTC Reply

-I see I have editing access to World-Jumper's post. Accidental, global, or special? I'm guessing the latter by the fact that I also seem to have ban access (which will need someone else on hand to test it - any volunteers?).

-Editing interacts badly with the user-page thing: World-Jumper's name now links to my profile, implying I wrote the original post.

-How many digits can your user list run to? I'm user 27; does it break if you hit three digits? Four? Ten (somehow)?

-When I logged in on this computer it was sitting on Subforum view. If that's a default view, it would be best to switch it to Sort By Date.

hS

Expand this post →

Re: your further comments by Tomash on 2015-09-17 14:00:00 UTC Reply
- You have global edit (and ban) access because I set your mod flag years ago.
  
  - That was intentional on my part. Can't have the Shadowy Cabal of Mods (tm) editing posts left and right without a trace :). Do note, that if you go look at the previous version and click the username, you see the actual author.
  
  - I think we can have up to 2^31 - 1 user IDs and posts. We've got a long ways to go before that's an issue.
  
  - The mode setting has a long memory. You were probably testing subforum mode years ago.
Expand this post →

The Shadowy Cabal. by Huinesoron on 2015-09-17 14:09:00 UTC Reply

I agree that admin editing should be signposted, but I don't think hiding it behind the username is the best option. It's not obvious, and when you notice it, it looks like the whole post was written by a lying administrator.

Would it be possible to change the 'previous versions' thing to specify 'This post was edited on [date] by [mod/user]. The previous version is located here.', and leave the profile link intact?

hS

It's possible by Tomash on 2015-09-17 14:28:00 UTC Reply

I'd need yet another database field to store who actually edited tho post, but I can do that. The date, however, I can add pretty quickly.

Some little commentary. by World-Jumper on 2015-09-17 08:23:00 UTC Reply

First of all, I am program and webpage illiterate. Consider me a rubber duck that can tell you exactly how lost it is.

The layout seems nice, on the whole. The spoiler system works, which is nice. I do find myself getting lost in threads, though. Even trying to go down hS's test posts made it hard to tell where in the conversation I was. Then again, that may just be me and my android.

I do like the tags, though their use to make subgroups makes me slightly nervous, but that is just me. However, on the mobile site, the tag checkboxes are cut off. You can barely click them, and can only see one pixel of the checkmark that tells you what you picked. If it helps, I'm using Firefox.

Other then that, it looks good. If when you are ready for a stress test, I can continue the Whose Line thread there.

Oh, yeah, I'm the Host by the way. Somebody else can totally take up the mantle if they so desire. Just, not in the middle of a game. I do want to keep things consistent, after all.

Expand this post →

Re: tag checkboxes by Tomash on 2015-09-17 14:19:00 UTC Reply

Yep. That seems to be a thing. I'll try to figure out wtf. I hate mobile issues. So much harder to debug.

Thanks for letting me know.

Fixed.? (nm) by Tomash on 2015-09-17 15:07:00 UTC Reply

Yes, it is. Thanks! (nm) by World-Jumper on 2015-09-17 16:04:00 UTC Reply

Commentary: by Huinesoron on 2015-09-17 07:28:00 UTC Reply

-The poofed threads thing I've showcased.
--The poofed subthread... isn't poofed on the main view the way it is in a thread view? Is that because you're assuming the Bad Stuff will be message-content, not title?

-I keep trying to click 'watch this thread' instead of 'return to messages'.

-Your version of the header is out of date. (I know, not a bug report.)

-How do people feel about everyone having access to their email? Where 'everyone' presumably includes any moderately-intelligent spambot.

-Do you have any usage statistics available? That would be lovely.

I'm sure there'll be more.

hS

Expand this post →

Regarding e-mail addresses by the Irish Samurai on 2015-09-17 10:24:00 UTC Reply

Unless I've missed it appearing somewhere else, your email address is only viewable after clicking on the 'Author' field, which takes you to the relevant userpage. However, you only get to view userpages if you're signed in - and I'm assuming that spambots (even moderately intelligent ones) aren't going to actually create accounts to sign in.

- Irish

Yep. by Tomash on 2015-09-17 13:53:00 UTC Reply

You can't see emails without an account. So, like you said, they're probably safe from spambots in a security by obscurity way (someone'd have to figure out the site exists, make an account, and rig a scraper for our user pages)

Apparently something went wrong. by JulyFlame on 2015-09-17 01:13:00 UTC Reply

Won't allow me to reply.

Should be fixed ... by Tomash on 2015-09-17 02:30:00 UTC Reply

in a minute or two.

I thought I'd zapped every call to that method.