Archived community forum thread. Because all of the old forum posts are listed on a single page, you may see memory errors; if so, try reloading the page. To make new posts, go up one level to the new community forum and click "create new topic".
Archived community forum thread. Because all of the old forum posts are listed on a single page, you may see memory errors; if so, try reloading the page. To make new posts, go up one level to the new community forum and click "create new topic".
Comments
narcogen
displayname test
another displayname test
Anonymous (not verified)
here we go again
In reply to: displayname testComment body test.
The displayed name should be "Anonymous Jerkoff Two"
Anonymous (not verified)
just a reply...
In reply to: here we go again... to see how the parent ids are doled out.
Anonymous (not verified)
reply to "displayname test"
In reply to: displayname testYet again, following the parent-child data...
wodasini
WTH did you do to the forums??
In reply to: displayname testI changed my style for r.net and now the forums display the entire post from every post. And I can only reply to posts. There is no post button. I've tried all the different styles and none work right! WTH is this :(
narcogen
Re: WTH did you do to the forums??
In reply to: WTH did you do to the forums??: I changed my style for r.net and now the forums display
: the entire post from every post. And I can only reply to
: posts. There is no post button. I've tried all the
: different styles and none work right! WTH is this :(
Well.. what's your idea of "work right"? Tell me what you expect and I can try to build it.
Which theme are you using?
Which comment thread setting are you using?
Which browser are you using?
It's the *purpose* of the settings list-max and threaded-max to display ALL the messages on one page.
But if the "post" button is not displaying properly let me know which theme it is. I've tried all the themes on all my browsers, logged in or not, and the only time I failed to see a "post comment" button was when I was not logged in.
However, I haven't done this testing since some of the recent changes, so perhaps I've done something that has broken some of the other themes. Any of the Rampancy themes will work best with "threaded-min" and that's the setting that most closely mimics WebBBS.
kalis
Re: WTH did you do to the forums??
In reply to: Re: WTH did you do to the forums??Like the new look, Narc; very modifiable, malleable, and also pretty easy to use.
Only real problem I've found so far is that when I went to edit my settings, took a look at some of the themes, and decided to stick with the basic Rampancy one, then checked the forum... it seemed to default to a List - Max mode, which is easily changeable... but when i put it back to a Threaded - Min mode, I can see all the posts properly threaded, but they all have "warning: Unable to jump to row 1 on MySQL result index 54 in includes/comment.inc on line 286" right before the posts topic. It's a pretty small thing, but it does get annoying to have it in every single post...
If it helps, the index # is different for every thread, but the line # (286) is always the same. I checked all the forum display settings, and it only appears on Threaded - Min.
narcogen
Re: WTH did you do to the forums??
In reply to: Re: WTH did you do to the forums??: Like the new look, Narc; very modifiable, malleable, and
: also pretty easy to use.
Thanks!
:
: Only real problem I've found so far is that when I went to
: edit my settings, took a look at some of the themes, and
: decided to stick with the basic Rampancy one, then checked
: the forum... it seemed to default to a List - Max mode,
: which is easily changeable... but when i put it back to a
: Threaded - Min mode, I can see all the posts properly
: threaded, but they all have "warning: Unable to jump to row
: 1 on MySQL result index 54 in includes/comment.inc on line
: 286" right before the posts topic. It's a pretty small
: thing, but it does get annoying to have it in every single
: post...
Are you still seeing it?
I've been uploading new comment.inc files... oh, about every five minutes for the past three days to add features and/or squash bugs, and if you hit the index either while I'm uploading, or while I've uploaded a version that introduces a new bug, you may see these errors.
At the moment I don't see any, and Threaded-Min is the default setting for everybody, so if you're seeing them everybody else should be, too.
:
: If it helps, the index # is different for every thread,
: but the line # (286) is always the same. I checked all the
: forum display settings, and it only appears on Threaded -
: Min.
kalis
seems to be all fixed now :D [NT]
In reply to: Re: WTH did you do to the forums??narcogen
Re: seems to be all fixed now :D [NT]
In reply to: seems to be all fixed now :D [NT]Cool.
This post also allowed me to see another problem that needed fixing; namely, what happens when you have an NT post with a long subject. The index truncates the subject to 30 characters to keep the page width down.
But the system also wants to append [NT] to the subjects of posts with no body.
This can create two problems: one, chopping off [NT] off a long subject, and two, having [NT] appear at the end of a REPLY to an NT post, even though THAT post actually has content.
I'm working on both of those now. The idea will be, the system will automatically show [NT] at the end of the subject line only for posts that are really empty, and it will keep that tag as the last four characters of the subject no matter how long it gets.
narcogen
Here's a new thread.
Just checking out how everything works.
It looks like for comment moderation to be useful, we have to urge people to give SOME vote on each post, whether it's high or low.
Threshold screens out (reduces to subject display only) posts with a rating LOWER than a user's threshold-- but ONLY if the post has SOME rating at all.
Comments with no rating at all are assumed to be new, and remain visible.
narcogen
Re: Here's a new thread.
In reply to: Here's a new thread.> Just checking out how everything works.
>
>
hi!
>
>
It looks like for comment moderation to be useful, we have to urge
> people to give SOME vote on each post, whether it's high or low.
>
>
hi again!
>
>
Threshold screens out (reduces to subject display only) posts with
> a rating LOWER than a user's threshold-- but ONLY if the post has
> SOME rating at all.
>
>
>
>
Comments with no rating at all are assumed to be new, and remain v
> isible.
>
narcogen
Re: Here's a new thread.
In reply to: Here's a new thread.> Just checking out how everything works.
And I insert my two cents here!
>
> It looks like for comment moderation to be useful, we have
> to urge people to give SOME vote on each post, whether it's
> high or low.
>
> Threshold screens out (reduces to subject display only)
> posts with a rating LOWER than a user's threshold-- but ONLY
> if the post has SOME rating at all.
>
> Comments with no rating at all are assumed to be new, and
> remain visible.
Anonymous (not verified)
BWAHAHA FIRST POST
:::plants his flag, declares it a zone free of length limits:::
- Noc
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: BWAHAHA FIRST POST
In reply to: BWAHAHA FIRST POST> :::plants his flag, declares it a zone free of length
> limits:::
>
> - Noc
Testing, 1-2-3
- Noc
narcogen
Re: Re: BWAHAHA FIRST POST
In reply to: Re: BWAHAHA FIRST POSTWell, I've cleaned up the index display, added dates.
Working now on getting in the "new" display for posts added since the last login session (this will require an account to work).
> > :::plants his flag, declares it a zone free of length
> > limits:::
> >
> > - Noc
>
> Testing, 1-2-3
>
> - Noc
narcogen
Re: BWAHAHA FIRST POST
In reply to: BWAHAHA FIRST POST> :::plants his flag, declares it a zone free of length
> limits:::
>
> - Noc
Just testing.
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: Re: BWAHAHA FIRST POST
In reply to: Re: BWAHAHA FIRST POSTBTW... it may be a good idea to have it recognize posts with no new content and mark them as "NT" or something.
- Noc
narcogen
Re: Re: Re: BWAHAHA FIRST POST
In reply to: Re: Re: BWAHAHA FIRST POST> BTW... it may be a good idea to have it recognize posts
> with no new content and mark them as "NT" or something.
>
> - Noc
Except that with quoting now in, EVERY post has "new" content, since the word-wrapping changes the content.
I can have it automatically label an EMPTY post as *NM* the way the HBO forum does, quite easily.
I'm still working on:
narcogen
empty post *NM*
In reply to: Re: Re: Re: BWAHAHA FIRST POSTnarcogen
emptier post [NT]
In reply to: empty post *NM*narcogen
Re: emptier post [NT]
In reply to: emptier post [NT]This reply is not empty.
narcogen
Re: emptier post
In reply to: emptier post [NT]This post is also not empty. NT should NOT display in the subject line (at least not in the index, anyway... what happens in the message display doesn't really matter, since if you don't click it, you won't see it, and if you did then you're already lookin at it, so who cares?)
narcogen
Site progress
In reply to: Re: Re: Re: BWAHAHA FIRST POST> > BTW... it may be a good idea to have it recognize
> posts
> > with no new content and mark them as "NT" or
> something.
> >
> > - Noc
As you can see above, this is now added. Click reply and delete all the content in the "comment" box and the system will automatically append "*NM*" to the subject line. As far as I can tell, this is the way the version of WebBBS works at b.org.
Also, the forums now have their own XML news feeds, so we're back up to the same capabilities the Frankenscript had in this respect. Also, this is a convenient way to restore the "recent threads" boxes, which now appear in the left sidebar for the community and futuremyth forums.
>
> Except that with quoting now in, EVERY post has "new"
> content, since the word-wrapping changes the content.
>
> I can have it automatically label an EMPTY post as *NM*
> the way the HBO forum does, quite easily.
>
> I'm still working on:
>
>
Anonymous (not verified)
Oddly enough...
In reply to: Site progressNo one has said much here.. it may be the fact that it is only accessable via the forum link at the top of the page... which is probably a smart idea anyway, considering the fact that no one really wants to see Spam on the main page anyway ;)
later,
Mojo
narcogen
just testing the "new" tag
This would be a meaningless comment body.
Anonymous (not verified)
bring back the old design!
riot! riot!
no7orious
maleability of new format
I was wondering if the new design was open to suggestions?
Cuz I think that with big scroll times, not being able to use the back button that a frame on the rightside of the page could be useful for common places.
Myrch
Like ax said:
"teh suck"
Jackolantern
Look Halo news
Saw on IMG that Halo earned itself a M rating. Significant if you are under 18 or a marketing type. I wonder if this will effect Halo's cut of the X-box marketing pie. Of note is that it would not have a couple of years ago(pre-colimbine).
-Jack
ps:I think that the new site has a lot of potential and will be quite tasty in a few days. Keep up the good work
vector40
Question
Seeing as things are now account-based, does this mean that posts are marked as "New" in the forum depending on your last log-on, as opposed to by cookies? That would be nice--let you use other computers, or not have problems with accidentally deleting your cookies.
narcogen
what a "blog" is
I'm still writing the site manual to explain how everything works (and adding some new theme choices that should give everyone a way to choose a layout they like, as busy or "neat" as you could want) but I thought I'd answer what's probably become the most common question:
What is a blog?
Blog is short for "weblog". It's a kind of diary attached to your account. Kind of a personal news site. You can write in them, as several of you have done to ask something along the lines of "what the heck is a blog?" but you can also add any news item to it by clicking the little pushpin icon next to the news boxes. This includes news items from other sites as well. It's a way to hang on to items after they've scrolled off the main page-- they'll always be there in your blog where you left it.
no7orious
J/K, Yeah I am, but nice double post
In reply to:I am dragging along with me 3 of my friend, along with my dad. I emailed Matt about
Anonymous (not verified)
^Spoiler^ (within is a spoiler too)
In reply to: Help with Jump on last level of halo (I think...)...SPOILER!!!!!
you can't make the jump as far as I know. just go off the ramp straight and fast and you'll land nicely on the next ramp, with leads to the end. if anyone knows of a way to make the jump tell me ;-)
and from now on post things that spoil the game, to the spoiler form. you'll find a link to it on the side of this page.
Earendil
Ryan
Re: ^Spoiler^ (within is a spoiler too)
In reply to: ^Spoiler^ (within is a spoiler too)I don't think you can make the jump, either. Cortana says you can, but I think it's just meant to keep you on your toes. When you fall there's an eiree violin sound. They probably did this to make you think "Oh, shit! It's all over! Oh, no it's not!" One you land on the lower ramp, back up carefuly to get a full run up, and then just drive like hell to get to the end.
However I've had the problem where when you hit the ground you die, and I don't know why that happens. You could always try going slightly slower or something but I don't know if that'll help. You could try dismounting before impact but you'll probably get killed by the Warthog it'self. Try turning the to the side once you're airborne, so the camera is looking at you side on, that might help, as you land slightly differently. Just keep trying, that's all I can offer you, sorry!
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: ^Spoiler^ (within is a spoiler too)
In reply to: Re: ^Spoiler^ (within is a spoiler too)just keep moving forward. dont stop and you will make it. i never had trouble doing it this way
narcogen
Re: ^Spoiler^ (within is a spoiler too)
In reply to: Re: ^Spoiler^ (within is a spoiler too)Maco X wrote on Monday, 09/2/2002 - 9:19 pm:
: just keep moving forward. dont stop and you will make it.
: i never had trouble doing it this way
On what difficulty?
Narcogen
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: ^Spoiler^ (within is a spoiler too)
In reply to: Re: ^Spoiler^ (within is a spoiler too)narcogen wrote on Monday, 09/2/2002 - 11:47 pm:
: Maco X wrote on Monday, 09/2/2002 - 9:19 pm:
:
: : just keep moving forward. dont stop and you will make
: it.
: : i never had trouble doing it this way
:
: On what difficulty?
on normal, hero, and legendary
Miguel Chavez
Public/Private?
In reply to: what a "blog" is: Blog is short for "weblog". It's a kind of diary attached
: to your account. Kind of a personal news site. You can write
: in them, as several of you have done to ask something along
: the lines of "what the heck is a blog?" but you can also add
: any news item to it by clicking the little pushpin icon next
: to the news boxes. This includes news items from other sites
: as well. It's a way to hang on to items after they've
: scrolled off the main page-- they'll always be there in your
: blog where you left it.
I'm not sure, but I thought I'd ask... the paragraph kinda implies that the blog is private, esp.: "they'll always be there in your blog where you left it" But seeing the current set of blog entries, I guess we should be clear that all entries are public, or am I completely off base?
Great work Narc!
narcogen
Re: Public/Private?
In reply to: Public/Private?:
: I'm not sure, but I thought I'd ask... the paragraph kinda
: implies that the blog is private, esp.: "they'll always be
: there in your blog where you left it" But seeing the
: current set of blog entries, I guess we should be clear that
: all entries are public, or am I completely off base?
Nope, you've got it right. Blogs are, at the moment, public.
I *could* restrict access to them to just authenticated users, but I'd have to add a new feature to restrict it to just the owner. I'm not sure if there's demand for that, but I'm sure if there is someone will let me know.
:
: Great work Narc!
Thanks!
Cob
Taming the Blog
In reply to: what a "blog" isWill it be possible to alter the format of the 'user blogs' page in the future?
Having a gigantic expanded list such as the current case scares me and IE's pos renderer.
-Cob
narcogen
Re: Taming the Blog
In reply to: Taming the Blog: Will it be possible to alter the format of the 'user
: blogs' page in the future?
:
: Having a gigantic expanded list such as the current case
: scares me and IE's pos renderer.
:
: -Cob
I'll put this on the to-do list. It may be possible to change the default display to the first X characters of the blog with a "read more" link.
As it is, there is an upper limit on the number of items it will display. If it ends up being too high, I can lower it.
Also I am going to add a "view this user's blog" link to the User Information page-- that way, you can click anybody's name and then see their blog with one more click.
Cob
Sounds good to me...
In reply to: Re: Taming the BlogShould be an interesting feature. Looking forward to abusing it. ;)
-Cob
narcogen
icab, IE users' font sizes?
Ok, I've been fiddling a bit with both the site CSS and my browser settings.
Things still look too big in Opera because of the lack of any real CSS support that I can see.
IE and iCab both have options to use 72 dpi or 96 dpi standards for rendering. 72, of course, is the native for the Mac and 96 for PCs.
Are the Mac users out there using 72 or 96?
I find that with both IE and iCab set for 72, things look OK and pretty much the same now in each browser, but sites like Myth.bungie.org and The Mill look too darn small.
Should I assume people are using 96, and lower the font sizes some more?
That might help Opera a bit. But it'll drive anybody on a Mac using the 72 dpi setting nuts.
What does everybody think?
Claude Errera
Re: icab, IE users' font sizes?
In reply to: icab, IE users' font sizes?: Ok, I've been fiddling a bit with both the site CSS and my
: browser settings.
[snip]
: Are the Mac users out there using 72 or 96?
I use 96 for IE, so that I have a rough approximation of what a page will look like on a PC browser. (It's easier than running upstairs to the nearest Win98 machine when I need to check a new page. :) )
Something you might consider - switch to px instead of pt for sizes.
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: icab, IE users' font sizes?
In reply to: icab, IE users' font sizes?: That might help Opera a bit. But it'll drive anybody on a
: Mac using the 72 dpi setting nuts.
:
: What does everybody think?
You're damn right it'll drive us nuts! If you could, just leave it as it is RIGHT NOW, its the perfect font size, even at 72... I mean, if I'm not mistaken, is Opera not the minority? Which is not to say that the majority is always right, but I think in this case the majority should have a say...
besides, with how "customizable" this site is supposed to be, could you not just set up a preference to change all of the font sizes...?
In retrospect, I really like the way the site looks now, and it even looks correct in Netscape! Keep up the great work!
Mojo
Miguel Chavez
I leave IE/Mac at 96DPI *NT* [NT]
In reply to: icab, IE users' font sizes?Anonymous (not verified)
Re: icab 96 DPI
In reply to: icab, IE users' font sizes?I haven't changed the iCab preferences and it was set at 96 DPI (It has never occured to me to change this setting).
The other thing is iCab has a big red bold message on the control panel that CSS1 support is not completly implemented. So maybe things will get better as iCab gets updated.
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: icab, IE users' font sizes?
In reply to: icab, IE users' font sizes?Okay, two things:
One, that funky thing I mentioned earlier is happening with this post--when looking at it (your original thread-starter), it disappears from the index. When looking at any of the others, it's fine.
Two, why do I keep getting logged out of my account as I go through the site?
Oh, and I'm on 96dpi (Mac IE). But I may very well change it, seeing as I've never known about that setting before and probably won't be able to resist tweaking.
narcogen
Re: icab, IE users' font sizes?
In reply to: Re: icab, IE users' font sizes?: Okay, two things:
: One, that funky thing I mentioned earlier is happening
: with this post--when looking at it (your original
: thread-starter), it disappears from the index. When looking
: at any of the others, it's fine.
it's always been that way.
Having threads display at all was something I had to add-- none of the methods the system had built in did it.
When you view the first post in the thread, that post doesn't display in the thread.
However... since you're looking at it, you don't really need it in the thread to link to it.
It's a behavior I will look to change, but the priority isn't as high as some other things right now.
At the same time I do that, I'll be looking for it to somehow indicate which message in the thread you're reading-- by displaying it in bold and not as a link.
: Two, why do I keep getting logged out of my account as I
: go through the site?
:
: Oh, and I'm on 96dpi (Mac IE). But I may very well change
: it, seeing as I've never known about that setting before and
: probably won't be able to resist tweaking.
Pages