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.
7681
The Pub / Re: A question......
« on April 13th, 2011, 04:40 PM »one signature by one guy who's in the middle of a move. Not sure how a move holds up signing a piece of paper and mailing it on, but one would think that could be resolved in a short period of time.
Now, I remember the last time I moved house, and that was a mess for months with bureaucracy, so I can well believe the delay.
As for the mod community, yes, it is in mostly a holding pattern, on the basis that mods for RC3 don't really need much work for RC4+ normally.
7682
Features / Re: Core/Not Core
« on April 13th, 2011, 04:39 PM »Picking up on what texas has said, a better example (to my mind) is the Module Admin in FreePBX.
I dislike the idea of forcing a centralised system unless 1) the centralised system is designed to be the *only* place to get packages (a la Apple's App Store) and 2) it allows paid packages and provides appropriate measures for modders in that regard.
And there's a world of hurt in there if not managed properly regarding "openness".
7683
Off-topic / Re: YouTube using short links?
« on April 13th, 2011, 04:30 PM »
No, it's in the Spanish board, which means people just don't look there too hard ;)
7685
Off-topic / Re: Spambots
« on April 13th, 2011, 04:29 PM »
OK, right now, here's what we have.
9 or so CAPTCHAs, originally designed and written by me, using a variation of the code base as visible on arantor.org on registration. Some of them are animated, but the thing is, the variety of images really kicks out bots.
I also added Bad Behaviour as discussed, though I need to update to the latest version because I integrated it directly.
I do plan to rework the audio CAPTCHA too because right now it's actually almost as vulnerable as SMF's main CAPTCHA is.
9 or so CAPTCHAs, originally designed and written by me, using a variation of the code base as visible on arantor.org on registration. Some of them are animated, but the thing is, the variety of images really kicks out bots.
I also added Bad Behaviour as discussed, though I need to update to the latest version because I integrated it directly.
I do plan to rework the audio CAPTCHA too because right now it's actually almost as vulnerable as SMF's main CAPTCHA is.
7686
Off-topic / Re: Texasmans Programming Blog
« on April 13th, 2011, 04:27 PM »
I've had enough of people who think that throwing their weight around, that being shitty and arrogant and insulting is going to get them anywhere.
I needed a nice bit of time out from here lest I said something REALLY stupid, but I'm glad I did - I skimmed this topic and saw the increasing levels of stupidity, arrogance and idiocy.
I needed a nice bit of time out from here lest I said something REALLY stupid, but I'm glad I did - I skimmed this topic and saw the increasing levels of stupidity, arrogance and idiocy.
7687
Features / Re: Naming Boards/blogs/sites etc.
« on April 13th, 2011, 04:26 PM »
You know you can do that in SMF already, right?
Last parameter to parse_bbc is an array of tags that should be considered for that parse only.
Last parameter to parse_bbc is an array of tags that should be considered for that parse only.
7688
Features / Re: Another optional core feature
« on April 12th, 2011, 01:04 AM »Lets assume the brash and ballsy amarican is talking trash
OK, so let me spell it out for you, and I'll be sure to use small words so you can understand me.
We started Wedge because we had a vision, of what we wanted to see. Everything that's happened since you came here began to taint that vision.
We weren't building Wedge for you. We were building it for us, plain and simple, it just so happened that what we wanted mostly coincided with what everyone else wanted.
If you thought otherwise, I'm sorry you didn't bother to read what was put in front of you.
Id love to know how yall can work on wedge full time
Though, I do have some money from an inheritance that allows me to spend some time doing what I love rather than doing what I need to.
I cant and wont kiss your ass
One does not have to be present for 5 years or 5 minutes, to be treated decent.
I have better things to do than argue with you, I try to see the good in people, and when you first turned up on sm.org, with grand ideas, I was impressed. I thought you were quietly mad, because you had bigger ideas than anyone else I'd seen with SMF attempt, and I knew SMF's limitations would eventually have to be overcome, but I quietly had a lot of respect for the balls you had. The more you posted on sm.org, and later here, the more I realised that your ego is carrying you, that you really don't have the skills to carry out your grand plan.
I am well aware of my limitations as a programmer. Your ego blinds you from yours.
The bottom line: I will not be involved in a project with you, plain and simple. You have no respect for the community you're part of, that's obvious, as it's taken too much time to have to deal with you.
Have fun.
7689
Features / Re: Another optional core feature
« on April 11th, 2011, 11:21 PM »
Because all I'm seeing is hyperbole and "how we should do it", without regard for the reality of implementation.
You talk about making something like that a plugin, but without any explanation of how to go about doing so, in a way that would be feasible and practical to implement.
Ideas are absolutely wonderful, but there has to be a point whereby someone has to sit down and fucking implement it. Have you ever sat down and done so? Ever sat down and literally taken tens of thousands of code, ripped it apart and rebuilt it from scratch?
When you've done that, when you can look me in the eye and be aware of the *MONTHS* of full time work that's involved in implementing this, then you can start dictating how you think we should do this, because that's where this is going.
Since you came here, you have taken every opportunity to tell us how you think it should be done, and flat out demanded access to the code, and proceeded to demand to be treated as an equal partner, except that that isn't how it works.
I would not come to your site and tell you how I think you should run it, and I certainly would not proceed to keep telling you how you should build it, because it's your vision. You'd tell me where to get fucked if I went to your site and started lecturing you in how to implement things that will take you months to implement, especially if it might conflict with where your plans for the future are.
Now, maybe you will understand why I'm so pissed off. Hopefully tomorrow I won't feel such towering raging fury as I do right now.
You talk about making something like that a plugin, but without any explanation of how to go about doing so, in a way that would be feasible and practical to implement.
Ideas are absolutely wonderful, but there has to be a point whereby someone has to sit down and fucking implement it. Have you ever sat down and done so? Ever sat down and literally taken tens of thousands of code, ripped it apart and rebuilt it from scratch?
When you've done that, when you can look me in the eye and be aware of the *MONTHS* of full time work that's involved in implementing this, then you can start dictating how you think we should do this, because that's where this is going.
Since you came here, you have taken every opportunity to tell us how you think it should be done, and flat out demanded access to the code, and proceeded to demand to be treated as an equal partner, except that that isn't how it works.
I would not come to your site and tell you how I think you should run it, and I certainly would not proceed to keep telling you how you should build it, because it's your vision. You'd tell me where to get fucked if I went to your site and started lecturing you in how to implement things that will take you months to implement, especially if it might conflict with where your plans for the future are.
Now, maybe you will understand why I'm so pissed off. Hopefully tomorrow I won't feel such towering raging fury as I do right now.
7690
The Pub / Re: What about the blog module?
« on April 11th, 2011, 10:45 PM »Where?
7691
Features / Re: Another optional core feature
« on April 11th, 2011, 10:44 PM »
All I will say is: speed, security, customisability, pick any two. You cannot have it both ways.
7692
The Pub / Re: What about the blog module?
« on April 11th, 2011, 08:13 PM »
I think we covered that actually, because some areas in SMF already present their options in that fashion (in addition to the permissions area itself)
7693
Off-topic / Re: Spambots
« on April 11th, 2011, 06:59 PM »
Yeah, I guess it depends on the board ;)
7694
The Pub / Re: What about the blog module?
« on April 11th, 2011, 06:12 PM »
-sigh-
OK, so let's back up a bit to what's already been implemented, is already available and proven to work.
You create a profile. This is a set of permissions that applies in a board. You just set which boards you want to use this. Job done. This is even the case in SimpleDesk though it's an order of magnitude bigger.
No need for making a whole new level of permissions, complexity and confusion for the sake of saving time in the minority of cases. Not everyone is building huge forums that have tens of categories and dozens of boards.Quote How can it possibly be more efficient if it has to look in 3 places (outside boards, inside cats, inside boards) for permissions instead of 2 (outside boards, inside boards)?
As for not being an attack on intelligence, maybe not, but I'd think that maybe I'd have learnt something in 5 years as a forum admin, that I used when building my own systems, that I'd be using here. I'd also assume that I wouldn't retry things I've already tried hoping for a different result... you've made the suggestion, which is awesome, except that experience trumps ideas in this case.
OK, so let's back up a bit to what's already been implemented, is already available and proven to work.
You create a profile. This is a set of permissions that applies in a board. You just set which boards you want to use this. Job done. This is even the case in SimpleDesk though it's an order of magnitude bigger.
No need for making a whole new level of permissions, complexity and confusion for the sake of saving time in the minority of cases. Not everyone is building huge forums that have tens of categories and dozens of boards.
Performance wise, this does seem more efficiant
As for not being an attack on intelligence, maybe not, but I'd think that maybe I'd have learnt something in 5 years as a forum admin, that I used when building my own systems, that I'd be using here. I'd also assume that I wouldn't retry things I've already tried hoping for a different result... you've made the suggestion, which is awesome, except that experience trumps ideas in this case.
7695
Off-topic / Re: Spambots
« on April 11th, 2011, 06:06 PM »
reCAPTCHA is long since too much a liability for my liking, if humans typically draw a 50% success rate (vs 25-30% success rate for bots), and the fact that it allows for off-by-one errors... no thanks.
We have a custom CAPTCHA that I wrote, draws 9 or so visibly distinct styles, including some animated ones. Sure, they're breakable, but not trivially or easily. It's been in use on arantor.org now since August and while I've had spammers sign up, I've had the grand total of 3 spam posts from a human spammer.
The other thing is that not everyone has a Gravatar, so while blog users (especially WP users/converts) will be fine, it's not a safe assumption for the purposes of combatting bots.
There are alternative methods, some of which have been integrated already ;)
We have a custom CAPTCHA that I wrote, draws 9 or so visibly distinct styles, including some animated ones. Sure, they're breakable, but not trivially or easily. It's been in use on arantor.org now since August and while I've had spammers sign up, I've had the grand total of 3 spam posts from a human spammer.
The other thing is that not everyone has a Gravatar, so while blog users (especially WP users/converts) will be fine, it's not a safe assumption for the purposes of combatting bots.
There are alternative methods, some of which have been integrated already ;)