Public Pastes
BitBucket - Backup your code in the cloud! Host unlimited private projects, for free. SIGN UP takes 10 seconds, and it's free!
SHARE
TWEET

other Higlihhts from 9th November 2012

a guest Aug 16th, 2015 2 Never
  1. (01:54:30) +Beam: should we pester moot for a spoiler abuse template?
  2. [...]
  3. (01:55:06) ~moots: which board is it an issue on
  4. (01:55:44) +Beam: /v/, as in just story spoilers being posted for shits and giggles
  5.  
  6. (12:15:34) +duanemoody: too bad we don't have that rule any more
  7. (12:16:13) +duanemoody: wait a second
  8. (12:16:19) +duanemoody: > november 9
  9. (12:16:47) +duanemoody: yeah, didn't we have that pulled before the 9th
  10. (12:16:50) +AoC: Yeah, I still need something to cover furry and gore. And I literally had a lol u tk him 2da bar|? thread earlier
  11. (12:16:58) +AoC: direct mod action
  12. (12:17:16) +duanemoody: wouldn't want to confuse the poor souls
  13. (12:17:37) +duanemoody: like, say, splitting them into subcats of 3
  14. (12:18:10) +AoC: That would be nice and what I proposed to moot. Maybe it will implemented in time
  15. (12:18:25) +AoC: I still say that the best scenario would be to show what got you banned
  16. (12:18:55) +duanemoody: NO THIS IS SECRET CLUB AND WE MUST NEVER EXPOSE OUR INTERNALS
  17. (12:18:57) +AoC: Would provide context for growth, clear confusion and improve the ban screencaps so people can call them on their shit
  18. (12:18:59) +duanemoody: seriously
  19. (12:19:05) +duanemoody: yes
  20. (12:19:12) +AoC: well, actually this one is more about the system not allowing it
  21. (12:19:25) +AoC: rather than moots predilection for black box policies
  22. (12:20:17) +duanemoody: i find it difficult at times to distinguish between the two
  23. (12:20:48) +duanemoody: "the system works because I say it does" is more in line with a particular political philosophy that's losing traction over here
  24. (12:21:36) +AoC: Well, one is moot having a vision for the site and where it should go, the other is literally the code not allowing it. And diverting the few dev resources we have into the actual imageboard core is a mess
  25. (12:21:45) +duanemoody: i wonder if the conversations in the mod-only channel are any different
  26. (12:21:46) +AoC: HTML5 makeover was huge
  27. (12:22:01) +duanemoody: it's barely html5
  28. (12:22:14) +duanemoody: because dong insisted it be IE6 compatible
  29. (12:22:30) +duanemoody: and when i showed him stub code to make it possible he insisted it couldn't be dependent on JS
  30. (12:22:35) +duanemoody: which is all over the place on the site now
  31. (12:22:57) +AoC: optional experience being on JS is possible due to the optional nature
  32. (12:23:01) +duanemoody: it's table-less XHTML with a few hints of html5 here and there
  33. (12:23:09) +AoC: can't make it rely on js for the core experience
  34. (12:23:16) +duanemoody: as someone who does web dev for a living for a huge site i agree
  35. (12:23:23) +duanemoody: but i also know that IE6 has to die
  36. (12:23:33) +duanemoody: no one owns a computer that can only run it
  37. (12:23:49) +AoC: agreed, but I guess that a large part of the 4chan appeal is the web1.0 nature of it
  38. (12:24:00) +AoC: run it in decades old hardware if you want to
  39. (12:24:12) +duanemoody: decades old hardware can run Firefox 4
  40. (12:24:13) +AoC: just as we keep /frames, we keep IE6.
  41. (12:24:32) +duanemoody: i'm just saying it wasn't an html5 refactoring
  42. (12:24:41) +duanemoody: it was switching out tables for divs
  43. (12:24:59) +duanemoody: that's 2003, not 2012
  44. (12:25:09) +duanemoody: ok, 2005
  45. (12:25:16) +AoC: that's what I was going to say
  46. (12:25:21) +AoC: I was still doing tables in 04
  47. (12:27:25) +duanemoody: then you already know what i mean
  48. (12:29:07) +AoC: Yeah.
  49. (12:29:23) +AoC: All things considered, don't think that a full html5 site adds that much
  50. (12:29:32) +duanemoody: html5 is snake oil
  51.  
  52. And then some autists have the balls to cry about php. Cry me a fucking river!
  53.  
  54. (12:47:01) +duanemoody: seriously, back in 2008-10 we had the sage freehaven challenge
  55. (12:47:08) +AoC: and then we lose pages...
  56. (12:47:19) +duanemoody: which was to see who could post the most porn before a janitor noticed
  57. (12:47:30) +duanemoody: and it was always the wee hours
  58.  
  59. (12:52:47) +AoC: anyway, common knowledge goes that with janitors from applications the senior janitors move on to mods. But moot time is under effect
  60. (12:52:58) +duanemoody: i had no idea
  61. (12:53:07) +pr0x: Well then
  62. (12:53:12) +duanemoody: i have something else to be power hungry in
  63. (12:53:28) +duanemoody: i just want to do this job efficiently, not get closer to moot's taint
  64. (12:53:33) +AoC: and also trustworthiness, the reason I'll never move up. It's alright down here in the outer party anyway
  65.  
  66. (12:57:07) +duanemoody: i'll see about it; i tried to hack some the other day
  67. (12:57:55) +duanemoody: btw aren't we all pretty much using a pared down version of jQuery at this point
  68. (12:58:05) +duanemoody: like on the report pages
  69. (12:58:10) +AoC: in the inline? yeah
  70. [...]
  71. (12:58:22) +duanemoody: because this syntax is written using no libraries
  72. (12:58:32) +duanemoody: and would be less painful using queries
  73. (12:59:12) +duanemoody: and fwiw things like lastElement aren't universally the same between browsers
  74. (12:59:24) +AoC: I know, I had to do some serious acrobatics just to get post parsing going
  75. (12:59:27) +duanemoody: IE considers text a node and others don't
  76. (12:59:40) +AoC: guess I'll have to learn the $ bullshit after all...
  77. (12:59:44) +duanemoody: IE won't let you alter attributes in form elements "for security"
  78. (12:59:59) +duanemoody: and jQuery silently rewrites them with innerHTML
  79. (13:00:04) +duanemoody: but only in IE
  80. (13:00:31) +duanemoody: learning jQ is one of the better favors you'll do yourself
  81.  
  82. (16:01:20) +VCR_Working: http://boards.4chan.org/v/res/161836449 tfw gf and furry dump
  83. (16:01:24) +VCR_Working: why is /v/ so terrible
  84. (16:02:02) +VCR_Working: we're going to veer into style territory if we start that discussion pr0x
  85.  
  86. (21:15:44) +Beam: who deleted the rob thread
  87. [...]
  88. (21:20:04) +Beam: https://boards.4chan.org/v/res/161875615 man what the fuck can i even do
  89. (21:21:15) +pr0x: Great episode of jojo
  90. (21:22:47) +AoC: My tactic is to delete any meta or derail in the thread while leaving the original content
  91. (21:22:52) +Beam: http://archive.foolz.us/v/thread/161873731 Oh FUCK
  92. (21:22:54) +Beam: I deleted it
  93. (21:22:55) +Beam: fuck
  94. (21:23:09) +Beam: It looked like that retarded <pop> shit from my queue window
  95. (21:23:19) +AoC: sometimes they get the hint that the thread is supposed to be about topic and not bitching about friendly fire
RAW Paste Data
Top