Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Arantor
6391
Off-topic / Re: Baidu bloody loves me.
« on September 15th, 2011, 02:25 PM »Maybe they're getting better; I told Baidu to bugger off in my robots.txt and (so far) they've not returned (finger crossed, touch wood...)
6392
Features / Re: These two bytes may not matter to you...
« on September 15th, 2011, 01:47 AM »
My understanding was that topicseen is an older item, legacy from 1.1 or somesuch, but I have no idea offhand if that's still the case or not.
And yeah, I think the option can go, no matter how we change the index, I don't see us having fully expanded page indexes in there.
As for pm_email_notify, be careful with this, because there's a separate set of notification preferences buried in the members table and I'm not sure whether that isn't used in preference or not.
The other thing I'd point out is that there are instances in SMF where 0 is incorrectly used, so it's possible that even if the field is the right one, that 0 is the right value for the job.
And yeah, I think the option can go, no matter how we change the index, I don't see us having fully expanded page indexes in there.
As for pm_email_notify, be careful with this, because there's a separate set of notification preferences buried in the members table and I'm not sure whether that isn't used in preference or not.
The other thing I'd point out is that there are instances in SMF where 0 is incorrectly used, so it's possible that even if the field is the right one, that 0 is the right value for the job.
6393
The Pub / [Archive] Re: Logo Madness
« on September 15th, 2011, 01:34 AM »
Yeah, PM drafts wasn't thoroughly tested though I never had any such problems in my testing :/
6394
The Pub / [Archive] Re: Logo Madness
« on September 14th, 2011, 11:14 PM »
Hmm, I really can't remember :/
But I suspect we should really put that string (back) in, otherwise find an alternative solution for if the user presses save-draft when the thing is empty.
But I suspect we should really put that string (back) in, otherwise find an alternative solution for if the user presses save-draft when the thing is empty.
6395
The Pub / [Archive] Re: Logo Madness
« on September 14th, 2011, 06:06 PM »
I actually find myself really liking the header one even though the font is thinner than something I'd have chosen myself.
And since I posted, it looks like the header image changed slightly, to use the one that had the triangles more offset. Either that or I'm imagining it :/
Posted: September 14th, 2011, 06:03 PM
And since I posted, it looks like the header image changed slightly, to use the one that had the triangles more offset. Either that or I'm imagining it :/
6396
The Pub / [Archive] Re: Logo Madness
« on September 14th, 2011, 04:19 PM »I don't get a word of what you're trying to say...
The one I like is the one in post 585, with the two triangles almost completely aligned, with the weightier text. My concern was that the text might not stand out enough on pale backgrounds like the body of a post - like above.
I like the font as it is, it doesn't need to change weight, it just needs to change colour.
6397
The Pub / [Archive] Re: Logo Madness
« on September 14th, 2011, 04:10 PM »
That's the one I was getting at. :)
6398
The Pub / [Archive] Re: Logo Madness
« on September 14th, 2011, 04:01 PM »
Personally, I like the one that breaks the layout above there, with the fatter lettering but I'm thinking maybe the font should be lighter compared to how that one has it, because it doesn't really stand out from the pale background here. (The mostly/completely white with shadow look would suit it, IMO)Quote It's not just a logo for the forum. It's for the software too, because it'll probably end up bundled in some form or another...
:EDIT: And of course once the Wedge logo is settled, I'm going to be out looking for a WedgeDesk logo :whistle: :lol:
The only one who can decide on a logo for your forum is you, am I right?
:EDIT: And of course once the Wedge logo is settled, I'm going to be out looking for a WedgeDesk logo :whistle: :lol:
6399
The Pub / [Archive] Re: Logo Madness
« on September 14th, 2011, 03:39 PM »6400
Off-topic / Re: Baidu bloody loves me.
« on September 14th, 2011, 02:19 PM »
In other news, now it's viewing my profile 3 times over.
6401
The Pub / Re: Wedge financial support
« on September 14th, 2011, 01:21 PM »
It's also a bit of a stick (think carrot and stick) for people who want support on it: if I'm supporting WD, I'm not working on Wedge, and as ever people who want something for themselves as opposed to something for everyone without being prepared to contribute time and effort, I think they should put something else in like money.
(And that can happily go towards server costs in the future if necessary)
(And that can happily go towards server costs in the future if necessary)
6402
The Pub / Re: Wedge financial support
« on September 14th, 2011, 12:38 PM »
The difference is that Aeva is popular, and WedgeDesk... isn't what you'd call popular. I don't see it as a business plan, exactly, more like Foxy was originally, an add-on that's nice to have, capable and not needed by everyone, but for those who do, they'd probably be quite happy to pay for it.
(I'm thinking in the $30 sort of range at the moment)
(I'm thinking in the $30 sort of range at the moment)
6403
Off-topic / Re: An Ultimate Forum
« on September 14th, 2011, 12:36 PM »
There is no chance that this will ever happen, and one very good reason why it *shouldn't* happen even if it theoretically could.
While from the outside it no doubt sounds like it would be the ultimate dream team, the simple fact is that all parties concerned have different goals and wouldn't work that well because they'd all be trying to do different things.
SMF is conservative in its approach. It's not a criticism, but an observation: they want to release a piece of software that is in their own words "just a forum". They don't want one that has social features particularly, nor a gallery, nor half the stuff that we have or are planning to implement in Wedge.
Have the SMF team even announced what 2.1 is going to be? Last I heard, the *official team response* was that it was in the very early stages, which means none of the 2.0 bugs are going to be fixed any time soon and that whatever 2.1 is, no-one actually knows. That's not an environment that would suit us very well.
While from the outside it no doubt sounds like it would be the ultimate dream team, the simple fact is that all parties concerned have different goals and wouldn't work that well because they'd all be trying to do different things.
SMF is conservative in its approach. It's not a criticism, but an observation: they want to release a piece of software that is in their own words "just a forum". They don't want one that has social features particularly, nor a gallery, nor half the stuff that we have or are planning to implement in Wedge.
Have the SMF team even announced what 2.1 is going to be? Last I heard, the *official team response* was that it was in the very early stages, which means none of the 2.0 bugs are going to be fixed any time soon and that whatever 2.1 is, no-one actually knows. That's not an environment that would suit us very well.
6404
Features: Posts & Topics / Re: Like/dislike
« on September 14th, 2011, 12:26 PM »
I did say 'maybe'. I don't know yet how I want to play that, because there are consequences and implications that need to be attended to.
6405
The Pub / Re: Wedge financial support
« on September 14th, 2011, 12:21 PM »
This is why when WedgeDesk is released, I have no qualms calling it paid-for software.