Var x = document.getElementById("MainContent").style; x.backgroundImage = "url('http://i.imgur.com/2eODocT.png')"; x.backgroundSize = "100%";</script>
-
Everyone loves infiniscroll.
Infiniscroll + Android Gingerbread browser = BAD
granted i may be TRWTF for still using Gingerbread, but the tablet was a free-to-me and it still works (for a given value of work)
-
That's a cool avatar.
-
Furries!
EDIT: Shit oh wait... goddamned
-
That's a cool avatar.
Thanks! I'm quite happy with it myself.Furries!
And that's bad because?
-
Because @blakeyrat just has to have something to complain about, I guess
-
Because rats don't have fur?
-
Because rats don't have fur?
I can see why that would make someone jealous.
Actually, during the winter at least, I'm also jealous i don't have fur. During the summer, not so much.
oh, and then there's the fleas... ouch.
You know what, I think i'll just stick to using a... what do they call it... oh! Jacket. I'll just use a jacket.
-
public string Content_IfYouUseThisYouWillUnleashDemonsFromHell; public string Content { get { return Sanitize(Content_IfYouUseThisYouWillUnleashDemonsFromHell); } }
-
-
>Keith said:
Discourse is the first of its kind in many aspects.
Filed under: Most of them negative.You couldn't perhaps give an example of a positive aspect?
The forums are much more active than they were prior to the change. Of course, most of that is bitching about Discurse and/or trying to break it.
-
Of course, most of that is bitching about Discurse and/or trying to break it.
People like to complain about @apapadimoulis' move to Discourse, but clearly he just wanted to give us some more source material.
-
I feel like it would be safe to apply the 80-20 rule to posts on discourse.
80% are issues/complaints about discourse (including bugs, xss, general abuses, etc)
20% is all other content.
-
To be fair, this thread isn't about a vulnerability in Discourse.
-
But it's launched from discourse, so still falls in the 80% area. It just happens to share part of the glory with front page. (General abuses, to be exact)
-
The forums are much more active than they were prior to the change. <small><small>Of course, most of that is bitching about Discurse and/or trying to break it.
+<
-
-
Edit -PJH.
Ok guys, stop breaking the main site please.
Yes, please... stop fucking with the main site. It impacts a lot of people. I know I have to fix the XSS thing.
-
Just a general FYI - leaders can still edit the topic for closed topics. I assume people behaved though?
-
-
Just a general FYI - leaders can still edit the topic for closed topics. I assume people behaved though?
Editing closed (and, indeed, archived) topics is a known 'issue.' People seem to have behaved however.
Future infractions of this nature however (i.e. not confined solely to the forums, and - specifically - deliberately affecting the main site,) will be frowned upon. Strongly.
And this does cover, in future, breaking stuff over on meta.d in case anyone needs it spelling out.
You must be new here.
As I've pointed out previously on here, there are lines that aren't stepped over - most, if not all regulars, are aware of them and don't step over them - some have even asked when not sure (to be told "no, that's a bad idea.")
Honour system sorta works around here....
-
And this does cover, in future, breaking stuff over on meta.d in case anyone needs it spelling out.
No problem. We'll just sit and wait until it breaks by itself.
-
As I've pointed out previously on here, there are lines that aren't stepped over - most, if not all regulars, are aware of them and don't step over them - some have even asked when not sure (to be told "no, that's a bad idea.")
Honour system sorta works around here....
You're probably right. I guess we restrict our shenanigans to trolling and pedantic dickweedery, both good clean fun.
-
As I've pointed out previously on here, there are lines that aren't stepped over - most, if not all regulars, are aware of them and don't step over them - some have even asked when not sure (to be told "no, that's a bad idea.")
Honour system sorta works around here....
I am amused at how well the honor system works out in a group that prides itself on pedantic dickweedery, trolling, and Proudly Doing It Wrong™. I'm on other forums that are aggressively moderated and TDWTF makes me wonder if strong moderation is even necessary.
Though we are a fairly smallish community, so that could be a factor.
-
After rummaging in the Likes thread, I found a quote of mine that summed it up:
We may be bastards, inglorious, magnificent or merely average bastards. But we're ethical bastards. Good men don't need rules. Even the bastardish good men.
We as a community are creative anarchists - but we're also, largely, self moderating creative anarchists.
More than I can say for Jeff.
It's still true.
-
We are IT people, it's our nature to care for the health of our environment.
-
I don't think the old forum had any moderation. Other than spam removal.
-
PJH is here simply to moderate the software, not the users.
-
I don't think the old forum had any moderation. Other than spam removal.
There was some, but mostly limited to xkcd transformations. The real moderation was pretty much limited to a couple of users.
-
We are IT people, it's our nature to care for the health of our environment.
We call it "natural selection". If your software can't withstand a bunch of devs who generally CBA to scour for a proper exploit, good luck having it withstand security specialists aimed at stealing users' data.
I'm kinda restraining myself here (except for this thread - it was kinda immature, but hell, I was bored...), mostly since I don't like crapping in my own nest. Also, I generally CBA to go through Discourse's GitHub, more so because of the technologies they use.
We as a community are creative anarchists - but we're also, largely, self moderating creative anarchists.
Let's just say we're the kind of people for whom fa-spin is the proof of concept.
I don't think the old forum had any moderation. Other than spam removal.
I think my buttcrack-injection was removed once.
-
There was some, but mostly limited to xkcd transformations.
And fixing newbie mistakes, like lack of line breaks and stuff like that.
-
I'm on other forums that are aggressively moderated and TDWTF makes me wonder if strong moderation is even necessary.
Thankfully, it isn't necessary here. Or at least I've not found it so.
Moderators going around wielding their nail-festooned mod-stick, I find, tend to be counter productive. I'm sure a few who've been around here for around 3 months may know what I mean.
Though we are a fairly smallish community, so that could be a factor.
I'd prefer cohesive to small, but yes - I think that's part of it.
I don't think the old forum had any moderation. Other than spam removal.
It had lots of moderation. Spam removal, however, was the only moderation that was actually required and the only visible stuff everyone else saw. Apart from the occasional formatting correction or XKCD->Rosie shadowmod stuff that is.
PJH is here simply to moderate the software, not the users.
?
Serious question... care to expound on that?
-
Basically it's that we as a community would abuse the software even more if you weren't there to make sure things were updated etc. Less moderation, more protection.
-
-
I'm kinda restraining myself here (except for this thread - it was kinda immature, but hell, I was bored...), mostly since I don't like crapping in my own nest.
TBH, I think it's more of a "do unto others what you want done to yourself" thing.
Except in this case the thing you don't want done to you is XSS stealing your bank credentials. Basically no one puts in their own malicious XSS or whatever for fear that someone else would do the same thing back to them.And the don't poop where you eat/sleep thing, that too.
-
Looks like nobody grabbed a screenshot for posterity. I just copied the title of this topic into the console to reproduce what it would have looked like.
Looks extra awesome with the burning Oracle plane, I must say.
-
+
-
==? <v1 ready. >
-
-
Looks extra awesome with the burning Oracle plane, I must say.
Seems extra fitting with Jeff saying that Disourse is like building a plane in flight.
-
Considering how this board doesn't want to have (m)any moderators the amount of people who can edit other peoples post(title) is suprisingly high (Leaders).
I remember editing 2 of the main-site XSS-topics by changing every < into a < and every > into a >. Not only did that cause confusion it also made me feel like I did I job I was not supposed to do.
As a Sidequestion:
@PJH Can you actually edit the rights of Trust-levels? Not saying you should revoke "title editing" since people seem to have reasonable fun with it on the Likes-thread. Just wondering is all.Also: \ is supposed to escape the next character but "&lt;" becomes "<" regardless. Is that a bug? Or am I stupid for trying to escape "&" with a "\" ?
-
@PJH Can you actually edit the rights of Trust-levels?
No. This has been a complaint over on meta.d.
The 'solution' proposed is to ramp up TL3 requirements so they're not actually achievable. Which results in the inevitable demotion of those who've already gained Leader.
-
Also: \ is supposed to escape the next character but "<" becomes "<" regardless. Is that a bug? Or am I stupid for trying to escape "&" with a "" ?
Yes.
Just HTML-entitize it.
-
Considering how this board doesn't want to have (m)any moderators the amount of people who can edit other peoples post(title) is suprisingly high (Leaders).
We can also relocate posts to another category.
I remember editing 2 of the main-site XSS-topics
Noble. I would've probably done it too if I'd noticed it first. Could've also moved them to a different category, since, I believe, only posts in the "Sidebar WTF" category are linked on the front page.
-
The 'solution' proposed is to ramp up TL3 requirements so they're not actually achievable. Which results in the inevitable demotion of those who've already gained Leader.
I'm just not sure how well this plan was thought through
-
The 'solution' proposed is to ramp up TL3 requirements so they're not actually achievable. Which results in the inevitable demotion of those who've already gained Leader.
*sob*
-
Just HTML-entitize it.
Thats what I did. Still feels weird.
The 'solution' proposed is to ramp up TL3 requirements so they're not actually achievable.
They will probably fix it in 1.0 ... Oh....
That was supposed to be all I reply to that but I can't just let that stand like this. Why does this forum have such an 'interesting' power-system? Argh (yeah, I know the answer but still... argh)
sob
What are you even sad about? You know first hand that you don't lose anything (besides 3 of your topics :D) of value when you get demoted. I am also sure if you asked nicely, you could get promoted into Leader without the Likes... And I know that you know that so meh....
Filed Under: Meh
-
If you just gave out 27 likes today, you'd be a leader tomorrow.
Just saying.
-
Unless they already implemented the stage 2 of the likes requirement for Leader with the release of 1.0. Then it'll take him 27 days, one like per day. And receiving 1 like per day over 20 days.
-
They will probably fix it in 1.0 ... Oh....
Sadly (koff) I can't upgrade to 1.0.0 using the interface provided.
Sure I've linked to this, but for those who missed it:
https://meta.discourse.org/t/unable-to-upgrade-properly/19345
-
Unless they already implemented the stage 2 of the likes requirement for Leader with the release of 1.0. Then it'll take him 27 days, one like per day. And receiving 1 like per day over 20 days.
Wait, wut? Are they seriously considering that? I mean, I wouldn't put it past them ... but TDEMSYR!
In case it's needed, the "You" here refers to CDCK