News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Search | Register | Log in
Site Help
This is the forum to ask questions about this website, report things that are broken, request features, etc.

Be sure to check out the FAQ as well.
First | Previous | Next | Last
What Is Happening To Older Threads/posts? 
OTP: 
that is concerning.

In the current database, thread # 61341 has an empty body. In a database dump I generated on June 4th (before the migration), there is a body.

Thread # 61080 is a little more weird. On the website both title and body are displayed as blank, but in the current database, there is no title but there is a body, and in the June 4th dump, there is both a title and a body. 
 
just did a fresh dump of the database, the missing data is actually not missing in the dump file. Which makes me think it's just failing to display or be retrieved in queries.

I found another thread with a body in the dump but it doesn't display live: http://www.celephais.net/board/view_thread.php?id=8068

I think that there is a bug in the display code, which is much better than data loss. I will look into what. 
Partially Fixed 
The strings were blanked out due to the fact that PHP's default character encoding changed between versions.

I have fixed it so that the strings are not blank, but some characters are not displayed correctly (like the o with the umlaut in Zerstorer.) I'll try to sort out that problem sometime soon. 
Thanks! 
 
Test. 
😂😂😂😂😂 
YES 
 
 
😂😂😂😂😂 
 
Is there anyway to to enforce a limit on how many posts a user can make per day, per week, etc.? 
 
BRO I READ 1984 AND THIS IS HOW IT STARTS.

GO AWAY THOUGHT POLICE

/s 
Idea 
We can always apply this limit to mugwump only.
...and maybe to spam bots later :D 
 
I was about to not even dignify such utter bullshit but there is something to address here. Of course Mukor is absolutely right but it goes beyond that: this is a forum, a place to exchange and discuss ideas. The fact that a handful of sad excuses for human beings persistently turn everything I say into dragging moronic OT feuds is not my responsibility and I certainly won't take the fall for it. Is this clear enough?

What I've said since I'm back may not be to the liking of some but it is relevant, for the most part. That's what I meant when I said I'd be less chatty (well, besides effectively being less present on week days): more on topic, less digressive than I used to be.

And please, cut me some slack, will you? I'm excited to be back after so long despite the toxic people, it's the weekend so I have time and there's a lot for me to catch up. Don't worry, my logorrhoea will tone down. Case closed. 
 
Small amount of brownie points awarded to mugwump for the use of logorrhoea 
Haha 
Yes, I do have some vocabulary that exceeds monosyllables. To be fair, I had to check the english spelling before posting, though... 
Errrrr What Does #2209 Refer To?? 
I think a MINIMUM posting limit would be better. It's good to have action and a vibe going on on this forum, hype for Quake, it's user content, it's contemporary games and modern games from the perspective of all of us who appreciate the Quake "perspective" on gaming. 
 
I don't think a minimum posting limit would work. 
 
I don't know if I could could up with enough to say. 
 
If there was a minimum posting limit that is. 
 
Action and vibe is good and more perspectives are good. 
 
So is hype for Quake. I didn't mean to leave that out. 
Ban Rick. 
Problem solved. 
How About 
Instead of banning Rick, we ban dumb ideas?

Interestingly though, if Shambler had spread their 5618 posts relatively evenly over the past 14-and-a-bit years they've spent on the site, they would survive the minimum post ban! Assuming that the ban was "Post once per day or else!".

So would I, actually... 
 
Been away from my main computer for about a month or two, and when I wanted to see what I had missed at func I found myself logged out, and when I wanted to log back in I got this warning in Firefox (and my OS is up to date, including Firefox):

This connection is not secure. Logins entered here could be compromised

So far I've got this warning only here. And I'm scared to log back in now. Should I be? 
No Worries 
I get that warning every time I try to login with 1Password. 
 
It's a new warning in Firefox, but nothing has actually changed -- func doesn't use https so passwords are not sent encrypted over the Internet. This has been true since the beginning. However, the password is only sent once and then func uses a cookie to keep you logged in. The contents of the cookie are hashed. Long story short, this is not a super secure website so don't use the same password here as your bank account etc. 
First | Previous | Next | Last
Post A Reply:
Name:
Title:
Body:
message
question
exclamation
idea
flame
noflame
error
skull
beer
moon
pent
rocket
sheep
pacman
pig
cheese
worldcraft
gauntlet
crate
pitfall
pimp
smile
cool
sad
frown
oi
yay
tongue
evil
wink
neutral
q1
q2
q3
ut
hl
cs
doom
dkt
serious
cube
Website copyright © 2002-2017 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors.