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 - Cryotech
Off-topic / Re: Smf out of the game?
« on July 18th, 2012, 01:30 AM »
I found the culprit. I started seriously digging around when some programming sites I frequent were breaking too. Apparently my Firewall decided to start filtering them out as bad urls for whatever reason.

Everything's as it should be now. Thanks for the suggestions and help all!

Off-topic / Re: Smf out of the game?
« on July 17th, 2012, 09:55 PM »
no one other than you seems to be having trouble
Exactly my point of asking this question and trying to figure out why...
Off-topic / Re: Smf out of the game?
« on July 17th, 2012, 08:12 PM »
Alright, but performing 3 days worth of server tweaks that's breaking their site?
Off-topic / Re: Smf out of the game?
« on July 17th, 2012, 08:05 PM »
Odd, because I'm still having issues viewing their site in both IE and FF. I haven't tested other browsers yet though. I've attached a file to show what I see when I go to their site.

Broken SMF image

I tried to embed the image, but for whatever reason, the forum keeps breaking the link by inserting additional http:// information.

Off-topic / Smf out of the game?
« on July 17th, 2012, 06:07 AM »
Not trying to stir up trouble, but did the SMF community go bye-bye? I can't seem to access their site and if I do get their site, I get a very, very broken site.

I'm not a huge supporter but just curious is all.
The Pub / Re: The Cookie Law (in the UK at least)
« on April 23rd, 2012, 11:18 PM »
In a perfect world, no you shouldn't, in a world dictated by the statutes of the U.N and international treaties, yes you will. That's how countries with no copyright laws are able to be forced into extraditing pirates, even if they're nationals, to countries that do have those laws for prosecution in foreign courts.

But in all reality, you don't have to worry about it right now, at least not for a few years. Again, having been a US federal officer for nearly 12 years, I can pretty much guarantee this will not be enforceable for many, many years if at all until the governments worldwide start mandating all websites be hosted on government servers for tracking purposes. The cost alone of enforcing would be astronomical in nature and would be a huge drain on already financially unstable economies.

Until that day happens, I'm not going to worry about it. I already do what I can to protect my users, I don't need Big Brother doing it for me.

Also, don't forget, ID sessions for members is a whole lot different than needing ID sessions for guests which seems to be the focal point of the debate. Members need ID sessions to perform unique functions on the site, guests, however do not for obvious reasons.
Off-topic / Re: French election
« on April 23rd, 2012, 08:36 AM »
We should do Europe a favor and just write Nao in as president :D
The Pub / Re: Number of 'online users'
« on April 23rd, 2012, 08:15 AM »
Too be honest, I never really used that to determine user activity. I've always used the server's logging system because it's more accurate and contains more information.

I own a couple of sites, one of which receives nearly 2,000,000 unique hits a month with a forum. On any given day there could be well over 500 "users" playing around in the forum playing games, posting, reading what have you. Out of those nearly 1/4 to 1/2 will be listed as "Guest" and there many times this number is significantly inaccurate.

I wouldn't care one way or another but removing it will increase load time due to there not being queries being made for guests which tend to be bots anyways.

@ Arantor - I realize it can be hard, but don't take it personal bud. You have more peeps rooting you on then you realize. So here's a pint on me (or your choice of chillaxing beverage) and a steak. If you're a vegetarian, make it a carrot :D.
The Pub / Re: The Cookie Law (in the UK at least)
« on April 12th, 2012, 04:08 AM »
I wouldn't get to hung up about it, For one thing, the onus to actually enforce this law will be on both the ISPs and Big Brother and though they'll target a few companies (most likely the competitors of Big Sister - Google), they won't have the funds, nor the man power, to enforce this.

I guarantee it. I was a Federal Officer for 12 years and there's already laws on the books pertaining to this sort of thing even here in the states and the FBI never enforces them unless it's big, headline news that justifies their existence. Much like the DEA's war on drugs. One example is the harvesting of private information for Social Network sites. Most people don't even know it's a federal offense to ask for, or harvest, the private log-in information of users. How many arrests have you heard about in the past year alone? None and there's quite a few would-be, employers now mandating that people hand over Facebook log-in details so they can see what you're doing. I will say this though, now since Facebook has released a statement against this type of practice, the FBI will target a few employers on the behest of FB just to appease the millions of mindless masses and to give FB a gold star.

Secondly, as long as you have it clear within your default terms of service agreement that your software (wedge) implements the usage of cookies for functionality (with details) and not tracking, and reiterate this within the privacy policy (which is site specific actually) and if you create the GA plug-in you make people aware of Google's practices at the time of them downloading it and installing it, you, the creator will be free of any wrong doing caused by any site because you've already made the attempt on your end to obey any, and all, fascist laws of the corporations.

If the site owners decide to break the laws, that will be their responsibility. I, for one, would rather NOT have GA embedded in any software and will refuse to use any software or application that requires or forces me to use anything from Google and there's a lot of people out there that feel the same way and developers know this. That's why they make everything "per choice" meaning, up to the user if they want it or not and the agreement is already in the installation. Will this change in the near-future? Most certainly. As you said Arantor, pretty soon it will be mandated that we all abide by the great and powerful Google and will be forced to use their products whether we want to or not if we want to be on the internet. But there's always ways around this too..

I'm not a conspiracy theorist (though I do believe having a bit of conspiracy theorist in you keeps you alert and aware) but I ask you this, why would a law that's supposed to be *helping* users such as you and I be co-authored by a powerhouse such as Google when Google, as well as Facebook, have been caught time and time again stealing and abusing users' private information? It's because the law is being written by them to protect them. Since when does Big Brother need a corporation to create laws?
I find it quite disturbing that they're happy with a blanket opt-in which would include Google Analytics.
I do too, but when the corporation is now the government, that's what you get. A corporation allowed to break laws and then allowed to rewrite old ones or write new ones to protect them while others are condemned, punished and driven out of business for doing the same exact thing.

The Pub / Re: Ready for prime time...?
« on March 30th, 2012, 12:34 AM »
@ Arantor - Ah, I see, and you're right. I was under the impression it was an actual warning system as you described. My bad.

@ Nao - The right-hand menu (not sure if you're labeling that as the action or main menu. The one with the quick access drop-down menu.) definitely could use some separators because it's kind of confusing at first glance to determine what child group belongs with which parent as it currently stands.
The Pub / Re: Ready for prime time...?
« on March 29th, 2012, 11:18 AM »
Quote from Nao on March 27th, 2012, 10:57 AM
Also, but for moderators only, that 'Issue warning' icon's position is annoying the hell out of me. I think I'll just move it to the Action menu... I'll have to find an alternative icon for it because Report to moderator/Issue warning share the same icon really. (Perhaps I could simply show 'Report to moderator' only if 'Issue warning' isn't available... That would make a LOT of sense actually.)
Oh, and the Likes list, too. That styling needs some love.
Have you thought about just having a "discipline menu" in the user's profile section that is only viewable by moderators and admins alike? That way you could simply tuck the "issue warning" that could be displaying all warning levels (such as Issue first warning, issue second warning, issue final warning type of thing) or even possibly an auto-updating one via a SQL request (would automatically update to show next warning level upon actual issuance of warning). That way you can neatly tuck the issue warning out of the way and have a complete disciplinary actions section all at the same time.

Thus, both making the lives of your moderators and admins a lot easier regarding issuing warnings but also cleaning up the interface while still allowing board users to report offending posts which in turn, makes the lives of your moderators and admins even more easy :D.
It's looking awesome Nao. I'm using FF13 and it seems pretty seamless.

I'm not sure if I should post this next tidbit here or in the bug section and I apologize if it's in the wrong place. I don't *think* it's a bug, just a loading time issue.

When clicking on the quick access drop-down menu and selecting a board / section, I receive a "Loading" pop-up message at the top of my screen. The loading hangs for about 3 seconds before I'm redirected to my requested page and this happens regardless of my destination choice.

In any case, I'm definitely loving what I'm seeing :).
Features / Re: Public & Private Groups?
« on September 7th, 2011, 08:53 PM »
Quote from Arantor
Yes, there is already an importer of such data, I'm fairly sure that was covered in the FAQs somewhere though...
Thanks for the info Arantor. Also, unless I keep reading over it without realizing it, I can't find where it's mentioned in the FAQs.
Quote from Nao
Btw. User owned boards aren't implemented in Wedge yet. Only in and (not the same codebase at all).
It's in my to-do for 1.0 though. But it probably won't be in the alpha except for the id_owner field being created.
Aw, a bit disheartening but at least it's on your to-do list :) and hopefully alpha will be released soon. I'm pretty excited about it and have already begun informing my members that we'll be moving to Wedge once it's finalized as stable.
Features / Re: Public & Private Groups?
« on September 7th, 2011, 01:08 AM »
Quote from DirtRider on August 20th, 2011, 03:49 PM
That is actually a far better way of handling it I think.
I would have to agree. It allows for more personalized freedom in terms of "group ownership".

I can't wait until a public version is released. I'm currently building a new website and I'd love to be able to test drive Wedge on it rather than SMF.

Speaking of, will Wedge allow us to port over SMF database information such as member information?
Features / Re: Public & Private Groups?
« on August 18th, 2011, 09:34 PM »
Nice! I absolutely love hearing that  :cool:

And maybe I'm being blind, but where do I download the wedge forum software? I can't seem to find it on this site and I'd like to run a test installation.