So I recently discovered this site. First of all I appreciate that this place is fully functional without JS. I would like to know if the board software is available. I would love to use it in my site. How does this site control spam though?
>>418453 >First of all I appreciate that this place is fully functional hahaha good joke
>without JS That's because it doesn't have too many features to begin with. In fact it lags behind very heavily when compared to other imageboards and has some serious flaws. I've been working on rewriting the frontend from scratch, adding a more classic imageboard view, but for every feature I cross off my todo list, I remember 2-3 new ones.
I do keep in mind to have the new code working without JS too, but I have yet to test it as such.
>I would like to know if the board software is available. It isn't for a variety of reasons, one of them being that it isn't in any shape to be made public.
>How does this site control spam though? We have vigilant moderators and some filtering tricks.
>>418453 I remember happily rejoicing about the support for JS-free browsing as well. It's a rare gem. If you want software, nanochan is also completely non-JS and it's open source. It might be worth seeing if that is also to your taste. I would not be surprised if you already knew of it, being a fan of less JS.
>How does this site control spam though? CP ad spam was a massive issue (at one point we got hit near daily on all boards) so in 2014 oh god that was 2014? there were a lot of janitors hired and soon some trade-secret tricks were found to combat most of the mindless bot spam. Our userbase is normally sleepy enough to not need captchas or delete posts.
>>418454 >hahaha good joke Sure, but what's on the functionality to-do list? We now have most fundamental imageboard functions working fine and I don't know many other imageboards with radios and archives. Even if the site is somewhat minimal, it's got all it needs and more as far as I can tell. The board pages even work now!
>I do keep in mind to have the new code working without JS too, but I have yet to test it as such. I'm happy to test on demo whenever needed.
>>418456 >Sure, but what's on the functionality to-do list? The most common complaint is that the current design is shit (doesn't look like an imageboard, doesn't scale with mobiles/tablets), so I'm redesigning everything. The old code is so basic that fixing things on it requires so much work, that I'd be rewriting it from scratch anyway, so that's what I'm doing. This means that everything that's working on the boards right now, is on the todo list. Most features are done though, but I'm stuck with one or two things I have yet to figure out from a UX point of view, so I'm fixing minor stuff until I figure it out.
>Even if the site is somewhat minimal, it's got all it needs and more as far as I can tell. Unfortunately that's not true. Sure, it works, but it isn't what people want when they come here. And there are many things which are buggy or outright broken, and many things which are expected to be on the site, but aren't. The current layout doesn't even have a mobile view for example. That's something that must change, because half the internet uses phones today. We don't have a big enough userbase to be able to afford holding out on advanced features, so the site needs to be more user friendly to attract users.
Like it or not, but there's a ton of JS required for a site like this to work in a modern way. There are lots of small nuances that you don't even think about, but requires a lot of thinking to properly implement. You have to think about what is the most user friendly way, and what is the most logical way, so it works just as people expect. The (new) quick reply alone gave me tons of grief due to that.
This is not even getting into future additions I want, which I'm trying not to waste time on right now, but I have to prepare the JS code to be able to handle them in the future. At the moment I just want everything to be added back and work. This will allow me to clean out a LOT of legacy code, remove old dependencies, and basically lay down foundations for adding more features in the future.
>I'm happy to test on demo whenever needed. And you have my thanks for that. Once it is done, it'll definitely need a ton of testing before it can go live.
>>418457 I definitely think those are fair points, I just think in most cases JS should be a bonus enhancer rather then a requirement. On some sites that can't be done, but forums and imageboards rarely have a need to require JS just to load and post (captcha being the biggest exception I can think of)
Regardless of that, I want the new design to retain every function of the current one, there must be no regressions. And that means there's still some work left to be done.