lucas, i've got to say. i haven't seen a single header for the website i don't like.
that said, maybe we could have a ttf decision week to week (or month) on what the header could be? i think it'd be cool, and would add more community ownership of this forum and it's unique nature (that being the small number of members).
that said, maybe we could have a ttf decision week to week (or month) on what the header could be? i think it'd be cool, and would add more community ownership of this forum and it's unique nature (that being the small number of members).
k.. lets do it
hey lr are you going to have an archive of everyone's usertitles and now the headers?
oh, i now see what headers db was referring to.. the text, not the image/logo. i thought db wanted to rotate logos with some of those previously suggested.
the text stuffs is definitely doable. as for archiving them: no, i hadn't planned that nor coded for it. archiving is costly. what is the use, you think?
the text stuffs is definitely doable. as for archiving them: no, i hadn't planned that nor coded for it. archiving is costly. what is the use, you think?
What do you mean by costly? I was thinking just having a text file with the different text headers that have previously been used.
i meant that archiving in databases is very costly, and this is the only way in which i could imagine archiving user titles.
if you'd like to archive the board titles in a text file, go ahead. but i've only used two as far as i know:
i summon you to appear, my love
[the current one]
if you'd like to archive the board titles in a text file, go ahead. but i've only used two as far as i know:
i summon you to appear, my love
[the current one]
So how it is costly? Do you mean it's not worth your time coding it so that when you enter one it puts it in it's own entry, or what? Is it because it taxes the speed of the db? You said "archiving in databases is very costly", you just posted the header text, and that's putting it on the db. So your definition of archiving isn't what I'm talking about, I just meant storing the text in the db for looking at later.
i mean it's costly as in the typical computational definition of cost. yes, it requires one additional table in place of one field.
> You said "archiving in databases is very costly", you just posted the header text, and that's putting it on the db.
yes, it's "putting it on the db," but i didn't archive the old one.
i think i know what you meant. you want to store all previous text headings in the database, right? when i entered a new heading, i didn't add it to the old one, i replaced it. archiving as you meant would require the accumulation of new entries in addition to old entries. the computational cost is huge (it doesn't necessarily "tax the speed of the db," it just makes all queries necessarily ugly and multiplies the size and complexity of the structure of the database.)
what's up with the fierce debate against half of my posts? not that i can't handle the heat, but it's very time consuming to go through and write a reply.
> You said "archiving in databases is very costly", you just posted the header text, and that's putting it on the db.
yes, it's "putting it on the db," but i didn't archive the old one.
i think i know what you meant. you want to store all previous text headings in the database, right? when i entered a new heading, i didn't add it to the old one, i replaced it. archiving as you meant would require the accumulation of new entries in addition to old entries. the computational cost is huge (it doesn't necessarily "tax the speed of the db," it just makes all queries necessarily ugly and multiplies the size and complexity of the structure of the database.)
what's up with the fierce debate against half of my posts? not that i can't handle the heat, but it's very time consuming to go through and write a reply.
and to reply further to db-man:
> this forum and it's unique nature (that being the small number of members)
that's something i'm very willing to change. i really wish more people would spread the word. a forum is one of those perpetual things, a social tool that grows exponentially.
believe it or not, there are 40 registered members, even though it seems that only ~5 of them post. someone has even tried to hack ttf:
http://www.thinktankforums.com/profile.php?user_id=28
and there's some random users with cool looking profiles chillin' in the back seat:
http://www.thinktankforums.com/profile.php?user_id=38
> this forum and it's unique nature (that being the small number of members)
that's something i'm very willing to change. i really wish more people would spread the word. a forum is one of those perpetual things, a social tool that grows exponentially.
believe it or not, there are 40 registered members, even though it seems that only ~5 of them post. someone has even tried to hack ttf:
http://www.thinktankforums.com/profile.php?user_id=28
and there's some random users with cool looking profiles chillin' in the back seat:
http://www.thinktankforums.com/profile.php?user_id=38
Fierce debate? I just didn't see how it was such a burdon, I mean I could start a thread with all the things in it, but the user titles would be a bit hard to monitor for me.
I just asked you what I thought was a straight question and you didn't answer it.
It's not a big deal that we don't have that ridiculous feature. It would have some value though, looking back at the old user titles at some point in the future.
I've been casually referencing ttf at all the other forums I visit too, hopefully some people will start posting.
I just asked you what I thought was a straight question and you didn't answer it.
It's not a big deal that we don't have that ridiculous feature. It would have some value though, looking back at the old user titles at some point in the future.
I've been casually referencing ttf at all the other forums I visit too, hopefully some people will start posting.
> I just asked you what I thought was a straight question and you didn't answer it.
i thought i did.. "i meant that archiving in databases is very costly, and this is the only way in which i could imagine archiving user titles." i guess i just didn't elaborate enough.
i thought i did.. "i meant that archiving in databases is very costly, and this is the only way in which i could imagine archiving user titles." i guess i just didn't elaborate enough.
man, how things change. one year ago i didn't want to archive user titles nor the ttf tag line.
and in the coming days, we'll have archiving of posts, user titles, user profiles, and forum tag lines!
i'm actually angry that i haven't been archiving user titles all along. i wish i could browse through my old ones. i've had some badass ones!
i'll try to get the revision system online within 24 hours. but i have to do some work for a job and for my research project. it kinda sucks that so many of my projects are just coding.
it really sucks that my research project with my genetic algorithm is in R, because the syntax is so different from php. like in R, you don't use semi-colons for an execution. so when i code R for a while then come back to PHP, i leave them out everywhere and it frustrates me. i also don't like spending so much time on my computer coding. thank god for gvim for windows!
and in the coming days, we'll have archiving of posts, user titles, user profiles, and forum tag lines!
i'm actually angry that i haven't been archiving user titles all along. i wish i could browse through my old ones. i've had some badass ones!
i'll try to get the revision system online within 24 hours. but i have to do some work for a job and for my research project. it kinda sucks that so many of my projects are just coding.
it really sucks that my research project with my genetic algorithm is in R, because the syntax is so different from php. like in R, you don't use semi-colons for an execution. so when i code R for a while then come back to PHP, i leave them out everywhere and it frustrates me. i also don't like spending so much time on my computer coding. thank god for gvim for windows!
personally I don't really like the idea of archiving profiles and user titles. profiles for the reason that someone may not want certain information about themselves available anymore, and deleting it from their profile, while removing it from public view on the site, will not remove it from ttf's database. user titles for the reason that I think it's just wasteful. I don't see any reasonable good use out of having an archive of this.
and I'm assuming the archives won't be publicly available.
and I'm assuming the archives won't be publicly available.
deleting it from their profile, while removing it from public view on the site, will not remove it from ttf's database
well even if you could delete it from the web server's database, you can't delete it from my four-times-daily backups of the database.
user titles for the reason that I think it's just wasteful.
man, i really wish i could brosw back through my old ones. i'm going through the history of my user title with the ttf interface and i see one that i like a lot.. i think "damn, i want to use that again!" so i just click the "revert" button next to it and it instantly becomes my current user title. :D
I'm assuming the archives won't be publicly available.
that's up for debate. post and forum tag line revisions will be publicly available. maybe profile and user title revisions won't be.
good point on the db backups.
I just feel like it should be up to the user to keep a record of their user titles if they so choose. I still think it's kind of wasteful, especially if ttf is supposed to be minimal on features. I suppose in this instance it's kind of at odds with being data obsessed though.
I just feel like it should be up to the user to keep a record of their user titles if they so choose. I still think it's kind of wasteful, especially if ttf is supposed to be minimal on features. I suppose in this instance it's kind of at odds with being data obsessed though.
yeah. well the great thing about the diff functions i use is that it doesn't diff by line--it diffs by character. so if you change two letters in the middle of your title, it only stores two letters plus the location. so it is an extremely minimal diff. but yeah, it kinda goes against the minimalism.
look on the bright side, though--it doesn't slow down ttf. it makes it faster!
look on the bright side, though--it doesn't slow down ttf. it makes it faster!
got a couple more ideas:
archive avatars
revisions for revisions (self-referencing!)
archive avatars
revisions for revisions (self-referencing!)
are the various archiving features going to be up to the forum admin? I know avatars are small and wouldn't really take up much space, but I know, as an admin, I would be annoyed with having everyone's previous avatar stored in a db or on the filesystem.
what's the deal with the archiving obsession anyways? I still don't see what useful purpose archiving user titles or avatars is. if it's for user convenience of reverting to one, I think that the forum software would be stepping into territory that should be the responsibility of the user. if I want to use an avatar again, I should save it on my hard drive or elsewhere. I just think it's a wasteful feature for something that's supposed to be forum software to archive things like this.
what's your reasoning for the archiving, I'm curious!
what's the deal with the archiving obsession anyways? I still don't see what useful purpose archiving user titles or avatars is. if it's for user convenience of reverting to one, I think that the forum software would be stepping into territory that should be the responsibility of the user. if I want to use an avatar again, I should save it on my hard drive or elsewhere. I just think it's a wasteful feature for something that's supposed to be forum software to archive things like this.
what's your reasoning for the archiving, I'm curious!
ah! the legend of the winged leopard web log version 1 suicides.
wlwlv1 was the first decent web software that i coded. it was both a forum and a blog (each user had their own blog); it had edit and delete features.
on two seperate occasions, a user went through their blog and deleted every one of their posts (which would also delete the corresponding comments made by other users).
i vowed: never again.
wlwlv1 was the first decent web software that i coded. it was both a forum and a blog (each user had their own blog); it had edit and delete features.
on two seperate occasions, a user went through their blog and deleted every one of their posts (which would also delete the corresponding comments made by other users).
i vowed: never again.
I guess I'm cool with the archiving, I just think it should be very apparent and obvious to users that they're not going to be able to edit things out of their posts or delete their posts permanently.
and I still don't think archives of user titles or avatars serve any useful purpose.
and I still don't think archives of user titles or avatars serve any useful purpose.
this would be cool to use in the design, if only it had a creative commons license :)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pamplemoussehihi/396569731/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pamplemoussehihi/396569731/
i have gotten blessings and the proper license from the photographer. :)
bumpbump
<3
<3
> I still don't think archives of user titles or avatars serve any useful purpose.
disagree.
disagree.
i don't see why the "archiving obsession" shouldn't apply to everything--each person is uniquely identified by a user_id, each thread by a thread_id. such indivisible units (see below) should be the only things that aren't subject to data obsession (because they _can't_ be)
user titles, usernames, avatars, user information, ttf headers, etc.
imhfo, let ttf : t -> R^2
if, for some t, ttf is unable today, in principle, to produce the associated image as it was for time t, then ttf has failed at data obsession
keeping only the indivisible units above constant should be sufficient to meet this constraint for all t
user titles, usernames, avatars, user information, ttf headers, etc.
imhfo, let ttf : t -> R^2
if, for some t, ttf is unable today, in principle, to produce the associated image as it was for time t, then ttf has failed at data obsession
keeping only the indivisible units above constant should be sufficient to meet this constraint for all t
real talk