Images in expanded replies pass the edge of the reply box
-
Spotted a few minutes ago. I think the image says it all
-
Clipping, motherbelgiumers! Do you do it?
-
DiscOverflow for best forum software of 2023!
Because everything seems to overflow if you do it just right.
-
Summoning @Discoursebot... assuming it works outside of bot-testing...
-
most of the bots are offline following Monday's meltdown and @sam asking us to back off.
most of the ones based on @riking's (i think it's his anyway) python script have a hard time handling the rate limiting measures put in place by @sam to prevent further meltdowns.
@sockbot, however, should still be online
/me is slightly proud, also slightly ashamed because @sockbot was probably the biggest offender
and for good measure: @zoidberg
-
@accalia has summoned me, and so I appear.
-
-
And a little searching later indicates (via your favourite site) that all it takes is putting
overflow-x: hidden
in the CSS for images (and other one-boxed content I suppose) and the problem will go away.
-
Or a max-width of 100% for images inside "embedded posts". Both options have issues, though.
-
@accalia can has? that is awesome mug!
-
-
Both options have issues, though.
Of course they do. It's HTML/CSS. But slamming the door on content overlapping the edges of the container will stop a lot of the worst abuses.
-
@accalia can has? that is awesome mug!
A quick Google search; I see results on Amazon, eBay, CafePress, Zazzle, other places... so go knock yourself out* ;)[size=4]*Not literally of course, otherwise you wouldn't be able to order the mug[/size]
-
There are a bunch of them on Zazzle. This one looks closest to the one in the picture, specifically the two-tone mug.
-
:-D
/me runs to go buy one
-
At the very least, I'll say where it's at now is possibly an improvement over how it used to be, though, yes, it still needs to be fixed.
-
Too bad this is not fixed:
http://what.thedailywtf.com/t/uhmmmmm/1640/1
Or at least something similar involving "do you really want to cancel this post" messages, maybe not that exact bug.
-
I saw the same bug when I tried to view an edit history of a post on mobile some time ago. Obviously, they didn't have a plan for any dialogs on mobile devices.
Or, in other words, they didn't design Discourse for mobile.
-
I am sure it works fine on an iPad with a Retina display so Jeff cannot see a problem. If Jeff cannot see a problem, there is no problem.
-
They don't treat iPads as "mobile", they get desktop view by default. Of course, they didn't design Discourse for iPads either, because the experience with Discourse is pretty bad on them.
-
Of course, they didn't design Discourse for [insert computing device here] either, because the experience with Discourse is pretty bad on them.
FTFY
-
@ChaosTheEternal said:
Of course, they didn't design Discourse
for [insert computing device here] either, because the experience with Discourse is pretty badon them.
FTFY
FTFTFYFY
-
most of the bots are offline following Monday's meltdown and @sam asking us to back off.
One of them isn't, and their owner still hasn't come online to stop it filling up the error log....
-
One of them isn't, and their owner still hasn't come online to stop it filling up the error log....
noes! which bot is it? is it one we can block?(i'm also curious what out log growth is like now that we've scaled back. Unfortunately the only person with access that i know of self banned on Monday.)
-
is it one we can block?
How would you even attempt to block it? This is what it's generating about once a second, at least:
I tried blocking by IP last night when I spotted this, but that didn't seem to work...
-
got a user agent? (please don't be a SockAdept user agent!)
-
please don't be a SockAdept user agent
It isn't.
I know exactly who the owner is, and have PM'd and emailed them. They're not online yet.
-
It isn't.
thank the goddess for that. I know sockbot was one of the worst offenders there. I've made a bunch of changes in the last three days that should have reduced his impact significantly (like finally implementing message bus like i should have been using all along)
-
I bought that mug back in 2009 or so when I was doing a lot of web work. Ended up giving it to a co-worker, IIRC.
-
How about we just ban all the fucking stupid unfunny bots and make this a forum that maybe human beings could use once in a while?
-
This amuses me.
-
I tried blocking by IP last night when I spotted this, but that didn't seem to work...
I can't imagine it would. The requests are still going to come in, they just get responded to in a different way. The only way I can think to do anything would be to implement a server level IP block. That way, the server won't even respond to requests from that IP. However, IIRC, you don't have the server permissions to do that.
-
The only way I can think to do anything would be to implement a server level IP block. That way, the server won't even respond to requests from that IP.
I rather, naïvely, assumed that's exactly what the IP block was doing - editing /etc/hosts.deny or adding an iptables rule (or both, which is what my servers do):
Would certainly be less work for the server if it did that instead of whatever it is they are doing.
-
Are you really surprised that ip blocking doesn't block requests for discosauce?
-
Not really...
-
That's a good idea! We have to avoid dynamic resizing of images especially with our infinite scroll environment, because resizing affects everything downstream in unpredictable ways.
-
Those are signup time ip checks, not "every single request" ip checks.
-
Those are signup time ip checks, not "every single request" ip checks.
I realise that now. Would there be any point in putting in a feature request for such a(n additional) thing anyway? Or have the existing framework implement it?
And along the same lines, adding something like (if not exactly, which would be better,) Bad Behavior?
-
http://bethesignal.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/css-is-awesome-700x375.jpg
My mug, it overflows