patrick.net

@Patrick

For the link to the latest images, can you add the #footer param to it?

Because it is at the bottom of the last page of them where the actual latest image is.

@DemocratsAreTotallyFucked

Sure thing, done. Though I used #last because that's more consistent with how that image thread works. Oversight on my part not to have it there to begin with.

Patrick says

DemocratsAreTotallyFucked

Sure thing, done. Though I used #last because that's more consistent with how that image thread works. Oversight on my part not to have it there to begin with.

Cool! Just tested it. Works great.

@Patrick

Tried using the font size attribute here:

https://patrick.net/comment?comment_id=2118924

But it just gets stripped out.

@DOGEWontAmountToShit

True, font size is not one of the allowed attributes:



The reason is that people could then make a post unreadable by making the font in a comment ultra-huge.

But with a bit of work, I could allow the size attribute and put a cap on it.

Patrick says

But with a bit of work, I could allow the size and put a cap on it.

Ok.

Do you have what is allowed or not in any master list? If so, can you post that here?

It would be good to know before I try to use any of them.

On the other hand, could be a waste of time as I am one of few PatNetters who actually embeds HTML in his posts/comments.

That is the master list. You can see which tags and which attributes are allowed.

Remove "share" buttons. They are stupid and should never be used; everyone can already copy links, and does so if they want to send a web page to someone. Everyone might not have known this in 2012, that "share" buttons are always bad unless they are only "reposting" on the same site (like Facebook). But they do now. (This is a reply to talking about "share buttons".)

The "quote" button is not always functional. Which is very bad when reading a topic with 500 posts over the course of 7 years, when you hit the "quote" button to a new tab for everything you want to reply to. And then it's gone and now you don't have people posting because many people don't want to read the entire hours-or-days-long thread a second time to get the posts they want to reply to back. Except that just now, the "quote" button didn't even work when I just pressed it (without opening in a new tab).

Also, the "quotes" are unclear when you are reading them. There should be a box aroundthe m or some visual indication that it is a quote. Currently, if you read only the last page of a topic and each post quoted words from prior pages, you would think that each member is just writing every word in his post himself.

Rayvn says

Also, the "quotes" are unclear when you are reading them. There should be a box aroundthe m or some visual indication that it is a quote.

There is, at least on the desktop. It's the grey bar on the left of the content and it's indented when quoted.

I don't like posts with links at the top and then the content of the article in block quote. If I'm interested I'll click the link and read it. Slowly disliking memes as well. I just scroll past at this point. I like reading words, not picture books. Can't appease everyone, so not bitching.

Rayvn says

Remove "share" buttons.

Thank you @Rayvn !

I really appreciate suggestions will look at these tomorrow. I have memes to push out today.

I would like a feature that displays who has me set on 'ignore'.

DOGEWontAmountToShit says

I would like a feature that displays who has me set on 'ignore'.

Ditto. They can't see our post/comments anyway logged in. It's nice to see who got so butt hurt. I get pissed with DOGE at times. Not gonna ignore him though. No person sees eye to eye 100% of the time.

Also lurkers old users come back with troll accounts that have certain writing styles that can be spotted. I've bitched about this before, but it's why I don't like username changes. Your original should always be there but do something like wookieman as fuckyou or whatever new name. I hate it when people run from a bad take they made.

DOGEWontAmountToShit says

I would like a feature that displays who has me set on 'ignore'.

Yes. And who the devil would have Patrick on ignore?

HeadSet says

DOGEWontAmountToShit says

I would like a feature that displays who has me set on 'ignore'.

Yes. And who the devil would have Patrick on ignore?

Maybe a better idea is to rescind ignores by users that were outed as bots or otherwise banned.

stereotomy says

Maybe a better idea is to rescind ignores by users that were outed as bots or otherwise banned.

Or were just outright wrong and ran from the site.

I worked hard for my "ignores". I wanna keep 'em.

... but yeh, knowing who did it would provide some humor.

Misc says

I worked hard for my "ignores". I wanna keep 'em.

... but yeh, knowing who did it would provide some humor.

I beat you on ignores. lol. I've only ignored known bots. Otherwise I don't ignore active users that put out good or bad comments. I'll respond to a bad comment, but it doesn't move me or lose sleep over it. Ignoring is childish if being honest (besides bots)

Listening to others take can open your eyes. I think a lot of my ignores are because of the fucking swearing I do. And I do get it that it might upset people, but I'm always going to swear so fucking get over it.

If you ever think of changing the site's byline, here is a good one:

'None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.' - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Rayvn says

Remove "share" buttons. They are stupid and should never be used; everyone can already copy links, and does so if they want to send a web page to someone.

@Rayvn

You're right. I have now removed the "share" buttons.

Rayvn says

The "quote" button is not always functional. Which is very bad when reading a topic with 500 posts over the course of 7 years, when you hit the "quote" button to a new tab for everything you want to reply to. And then it's gone and now you don't have people posting because many people don't want to read the entire hours-or-days-long thread a second time to get the posts they want to reply to back. Except that just now, the "quote" button didn't even work when I just pressed it (without opening in a new tab).

@Rayvn

True, I never did figure out how to do quotes on an iPhone. It just doesn't let you copy text into a buffer like browsers on a desktop do. If anyone wants to look into the code, just do a "view source". I'd appreciate help. It's all just me.

Also, it never occurred to me that people would try to use the "quote" link to open a new tab. I intended it to be used only on the same tab.

How should I do quoting?

DOGEWontAmountToShit says

I would like a feature that displays who has me set on 'ignore'.

I think this would contribute to the problem that kills forums: personal insults.

Patrick says

How should I do quoting?

When I disappear I'm usually on vacation. I don't care how the site does on phones. Works 100% fine on an iMac. I might take a dump and make a comment, but that's rare. The comment.

Patrick says

I think this would contribute to the problem that kills forums: personal insults.

I don't think so. I think soft skin kills forums. DOGE and I get along maybe 50% of the time, maybe more. I like argument or I'd leave. As long as I'm not calling him a cunt or something (I'm not) what's the big deal? You got the ignore feature anyway. You have the choice to not see each other. Or the choice to log out and see it which old and current users do that use ignore.

I do think it would be nice to know who the weak are. I know all the quitters after a decade plus. I know probably 30-40% of ignores are because of my swearing. Get fucked. Just words at the end of the day. Maybe make it so you can however private message the person that ignored you. I know I can be better but swearing is a thing for me. Or was it something else. Rarely have I gotten angry at a user and usually it was justified.

Patrick says

I think this would contribute to the problem that kills forums: personal

How so?

There would be the temptation to personally insult the person ignoring you.

Patrick says

There would be the temptation to personally insult the person ignoring you.

What's the difference between insulting someone who is ignoring you vs not?

Both are not allowed anyway.

Question: If you started a thread, is it possible for you to go back and edit the title?

Thanks.

@The_Deplorable

Sure, just click "edit" under the title. There should be an edit link for you for any threat you start.

DOGEWontAmountToShit says

Patrick says

There would be the temptation to personally insult the person ignoring you.

What's the difference between insulting someone who is ignoring you vs not?

Both are not allowed anyway.

My bigger question is what 10 people did I personally insult to warrant an ignore? I can tell you they just log back on under a burner or at least look at what you're posting. I know we have some religious people here and I swear a lot. I frankly don't understand how that is so offensive.

There's no way I've personally attacked 10 people on this site. Maybe 2-3 in a fit of anger. You can't change for the better if you just put blinders on and say it's my way or the highway. DOGE has pissed me off a ton. He also has good takes that I wouldn't have heard if I ignored him. Disagreement is good. There's an entire profession for it that pays well... lawyers.

There are plenty of people in the world I don't want to hear from, but even if they're right 2% of the time I want to hear it. Ignore is like TDS on steroids regardless of the topic.

"Question: If you started a thread, is it possible for you to go back and edit the title?"

Patrick says

"Sure, just click "edit" under the title. There should be an edit link for you for
any threat you start."

@Patrick: I don't see an edit under the title. What am I missing?

WookieMan says

My bigger question is what 10 people did I personally insult to warrant an ignore

No insults. They just don't want to hear your point of view.

True, that happens.

Happens to me with my own relatives sometimes.

The_Deplorable says

"Question: If you started a thread, is it possible for you to go back and edit the title?"

Patrick says

"Sure, just click "edit" under the title. There should be an edit link for you for
any threat you start."

Patrick: I don't see an edit under the title. What am I missing?

@The_Deplorable Is the post more than a week old? I have a rule in the code that a thread more than a week old cannot be edited or deleted.

Maybe I should change that.

DOGEWontAmountToShit says

Patrick says

There would be the temptation to personally insult the person ignoring you.

What's the difference between insulting someone who is ignoring you vs not?

Both are not allowed anyway.

I'm just saying that supplying a list of "enemies" would not be conducive to discussing points instead of insulting people.

The goal is to argue about issues we might be able to influence instead of attacking each other personally. From 20 some years of doing this, I know that personal insults are instant death for productive debate.

Patrick says

"The_Deplorable Is the post more than a week old? I have a rule in
the code that a thread more than a week old cannot be edited or deleted. Maybe I
should change that."

@Patrick: If it can be done easily then please do. This, in my thinking, could prove to
be an advantage for Patrick.net because as time goes on, topics grow and we can
make the topic of a thread more inclusive by editing the title of the thread. In other
words there is no need to start another thread with a similar topic.

Patrick says

The goal is to argue about issues we might be able to influence instead of attacking each other personally. From 20 some years of doing this, I know that personal insults are instant death for productive debate.

Yeah but they still can do a burner account and take a shit on your thread or comment under a different username. Users for sure have done that. They get to run and hide and then throw shit at us? Just talk shit to me. Why I don't like the name change thing either I've bitched about.

Not bitching at DOGE, just making an example. We've not seen eye to eye on everything. Whatever. But we're in agreement on things. That wouldn't happen if him or I just ignored each other. So NO conversation happens.

Outside of booting bots, I'm not a fan of the ignore feature. Your site, just input. I'm okay not seeing who ignored me, but maybe remove the feature though. Self ignore. I manually ignore a lot of users here. It's called being an adult and moving on from a bad take.

Patrick says

The goal is to argue about issues we might be able to influence instead of attacking each other personally. From 20 some years of doing this, I know that personal insults are instant death for productive debate.

I go after @socal2 even though I figured out he has me on ignore. I attack his bullshit, not him tho.

The_Deplorable says

Patrick says

"The_Deplorable Is the post more than a week old? I have a rule in
the code that a thread more than a week old cannot be edited or deleted. Maybe I
should change that."

Patrick: If it can be done easily then please do. This, in my thinking, could prove to
be an advantage for Patrick.net because as time goes on, topics grow and we can
make the topic of a thread more inclusive by editing the title of the thread. In other
words there is no need to start another thread with a similar topic.

@The_Deplorable OK, done.

Any thread author should now be able to edit the text of the original post at any time.

Let me know if you have any trouble editing a thread you created.

But it's still not allowed to delete a thread that is more than a week old, because people make a lot of comments, and then those comments would become very hard to find if the original thread got deleted. You'd have to look in a specific user's comments to find one from a deleted thread.

Patrick says

"Let me know if you have any trouble editing a thread you created."

Pat, It works! Thank you.

Woot! Never sure if I dotted all the i's and crossed all the t's until people start using something.