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.
751
FAQs / [FAQ] Re: Minimum requirements
« on May 7th, 2013, 09:23 PM »
@Dragooon: Fairly sure that's a bug, jQuery Mobile normally works better on Opera Mini than that.
@Wanchope: You can always press the Mobile button at the bottom of the page in a regular browser to get an idea of what it should normally look like (and does, on proper mobile browsers... I'm not sure WTF is up with Opera Mini)
@Wanchope: You can always press the Mobile button at the bottom of the page in a regular browser to get an idea of what it should normally look like (and does, on proper mobile browsers... I'm not sure WTF is up with Opera Mini)
752
Bug reports / Re: Infraction bugs
« on May 7th, 2013, 06:42 PM »
Well... yes and no. But you'll notice from the code that I changed terminology part way through (all the code references 'sanctions' but the user wording references 'punishments')
It's a hard one to call but yes, I think you're ultimately right. I'm quite amenable to the wording being changed. At this stage I'm still recovering from the last month enough to not be too worried about picky bits ;)
OK, here's the developmental mindset behind it. In SMF terms, you'd issue a warning. The warning was simply an increase (or, helpfully, a decrease) to the current % of warning on their account. It was an overall fluid state for their account, and cumulative the sum of moderators having their say on a user's account. The thing is, you can have 3 moderators issuing modest (20%) warnings for separate matters and leave the user post banned as a consequence.
In Wedge, however, it doesn't work like that. The idea is that you make the punishment fit the crime and that you have punishments tied to a given warning. The warning carries points and/or punishments (and the points can lead to punishments of their own for general unpleasant behaviours)
So if you have a user who has an inappropriate signature, issue something for that signature and remove it - and if it forms part of a collection of a larger penalty, so be it.
It's a hard one to call but yes, I think you're ultimately right. I'm quite amenable to the wording being changed. At this stage I'm still recovering from the last month enough to not be too worried about picky bits ;)
OK, here's the developmental mindset behind it. In SMF terms, you'd issue a warning. The warning was simply an increase (or, helpfully, a decrease) to the current % of warning on their account. It was an overall fluid state for their account, and cumulative the sum of moderators having their say on a user's account. The thing is, you can have 3 moderators issuing modest (20%) warnings for separate matters and leave the user post banned as a consequence.
In Wedge, however, it doesn't work like that. The idea is that you make the punishment fit the crime and that you have punishments tied to a given warning. The warning carries points and/or punishments (and the points can lead to punishments of their own for general unpleasant behaviours)
So if you have a user who has an inappropriate signature, issue something for that signature and remove it - and if it forms part of a collection of a larger penalty, so be it.
753
Bug reports / Re: Infraction bugs
« on May 7th, 2013, 06:10 PM »What do you think of my suggestions above..?
The look works, but I'm distinctly concerned that people will expect it everywhere else, which has serious performance implications.
But at this point, if I do that -- the moderation area is gone, too. Maybe they should be separated, code-wise..?
754
FAQs / [FAQ] Re: Minimum requirements
« on May 7th, 2013, 04:54 PM »
Even better than SMF4Mobile (smf-media.com) ?
755
Bug reports / Re: Infraction bugs
« on May 7th, 2013, 03:52 PM »- for each virtual board, store one or more random variables,
- then store a display variable that holds all of the random variables, associated with a number_context array,
- at display time, build the title from the number_context array, using the values in the random variables.
For moderation boards, you mean..? Or for all boards?
756
Plugins / Re: Plugins I refuse to do
« on May 7th, 2013, 03:45 PM »
Not at this time, no :niark:
757
Plugins / Re: Plugins I refuse to do
« on May 7th, 2013, 03:34 PM »
Joomla is militant GPL, anything that bridges must either be fully GPL or be at arms-length like jFusion is.
Though, given what I have planned, there should be little reason to go there anyway.
Though, given what I have planned, there should be little reason to go there anyway.
758
Plugins / Re: Plugin Documentation/Example
« on May 7th, 2013, 03:33 PM »
Yes, there is documentation - http://wedge.org/pub/feats/6898/plugin-manager-mechanics/
I did even post a small plugin here as an attachment.
And yes, just because you can't do full edits, doesn't mean you don't have some serious flexibility to play with. Large chunks of the system are built around a template skeleton - sort of like SMF's template layers but much, much more powerful. The sidebar is a template area, so are posts, and as such you can add items before and after others, practically at will.
I did even post a small plugin here as an attachment.
And yes, just because you can't do full edits, doesn't mean you don't have some serious flexibility to play with. Large chunks of the system are built around a template skeleton - sort of like SMF's template layers but much, much more powerful. The sidebar is a template area, so are posts, and as such you can add items before and after others, practically at will.
759
Off-topic / Re: Interesting feedback
« on May 7th, 2013, 06:05 AM »(because function leads to form, after all)
I can definitely tell that Wedge is NOT SMF.
:edit: Seriously tempted to set up a sandbox for people to see the admin panel and other magicalness that's going on.
760
Off-topic / Re: A Forum About Nothing
« on May 7th, 2013, 04:18 AM »
I only have a few distant memories left, actually. The player's stats were Brains, Brawn and Hoffness :lol: Yes, they correspond with KoL's Muscle, Mysticality and Moxie, only they're wittier than I am, which is the other reason it never happened. I'm just not as funny as they are. But if someone came along and pitched the right concept with some good writing behind it... who knows?
761
Off-topic / Re: A Forum About Nothing
« on May 7th, 2013, 04:01 AM »
KoL is epic. I actually once wrote about half the code for such a site (based on SMF 1.1.x) until the other guy I was working with had to disappear off around the world due to other life stuff (and I haven't spoken to him in some years :()
762
Off-topic / Re: Interesting feedback
« on May 7th, 2013, 04:00 AM »
The next alpha should be interesting, as the new warning system is complete.
I'd personally like to finish up overhauling the moderation centre before it's out but I'm not picky about that.
I'd personally like to finish up overhauling the moderation centre before it's out but I'm not picky about that.
763
Off-topic / Re: Shiny awesomeness
« on May 7th, 2013, 03:00 AM »
Interesting factoid, Wedge is almost 1000 days old. When we get there (it's two weeks or so), I'll make the video showing the history and post it on YouTube. Sound fair?
764
Off-topic / Re: Interesting feedback
« on May 7th, 2013, 02:41 AM »
I get that some of them just wanted the latest shiny. I just wish they'd have been honest about it.
As for the person that sparked this conversation off, I don't think they know what they want. Though they talk tough, I'd love to see them actually finish *any* of the things they're working on. Might be interesting to see them walk in my shoes for a bit.
As for the person that sparked this conversation off, I don't think they know what they want. Though they talk tough, I'd love to see them actually finish *any* of the things they're working on. Might be interesting to see them walk in my shoes for a bit.
765
Off-topic / Re: Interesting feedback
« on May 7th, 2013, 02:32 AM »
Well, I do try to test for the big stuff in that respect (my test installation has a dozen or so users with various combinations of group) but that's something that did irk me about some of the beta testers we had: while we didn't set out a test plan, we sort of hoped they would at least be methodical about it, trying out different things, but there was surprisingly little of that :( In fact, only a fraction of the beta testers actually responded at all in terms of feedback :(