The password isn't so bad. Its probably good, in fact, considering what goes on on these boards. Its just a rather awkward login
system.... unless you have cookies, I imagaine. It would be better, easier, if it just asked you for your username and password right
there when you write the post, on a post-by-post basis.

Right now my biggest problem - my computer at home has a small monitor, set at 800x600. This board's posting windows seem to be quite obnoxiously hardwired at 1024x768, which means I have to scroll back and forth to type this message. It is poorly-written html that won't work on ALL resolutions.

Personally, I think Discus, found at http://www.chem.hope.edu/discus/, is a FAR better webboard system to this one. Its really easy
to set up, too. I can even do it myself. :)

> The password isn't so bad. Its probably good, in fact, considering what goes on
> on these boards. Its just a rather awkward login
> system.... unless you have cookies, I imagaine. It would be better, easier, if
> it just asked you for your username and password right
> there when you write the post, on a post-by-post basis.

It does. If you are not logged in, Username and Password boxes are added to the reply and post screens.

> Right now my biggest problem - my computer at home has a small monitor, set at
> 800x600. This board's posting windows seem to be quite obnoxiously hardwired at
> 1024x768, which means I have to scroll back and forth to type this message. It
> is poorly-written html that won't work on ALL resolutions.

Poorly written HTML standards, actually. TEXTAREA tags must be given a specific height and width. There is no 100% like tables have (that I know of, anyway). I may reduce the default width to 60 at some point. In the mean time, if you do use cookies, you can set the width and height in your profile.

> Personally, I think Discus, found at http://www.chem.hope.edu/discus/, is a FAR
> better webboard system to this one. Its really easy
> to set up, too. I can even do it myself. :)

Flamebait like that hopefully has something to back it up. Easy setup isn't very compelling since any setup is inherently more difficult & time consuming than letting this run as is.

> Personally, I think Discus, found at http://www.chem.hope.edu/discus/, is a FAR
> better webboard system to this one. Its really easy
> to set up, too. I can even do it myself. :)

The thing that I have always liked about WWWThreads and Matt's board was that they were very close to how Usenet is setup. I like that style (threads are very nice)

Also, from what I understand, these boards are hard to hack around to hack a site.

> It does. If you are not logged in, Username and Password boxes are added to the
> reply and post screens.

Ah, well, that's good. But what if I'm on a computer lab at school? Won't a cookie be left there so that any putz who comes in and sits down can now post as me?

> Poorly written HTML standards, actually. TEXTAREA tags must be given a specific
> height and width. There is no 100% like tables have (that I know of, anyway).
> I may reduce the default width to 60 at some point. In the mean time, if you do
> use cookies, you can set the width and height in your profile.

Ah, I see. I never did figure out how to write forms in html... it would be a much better idea to assume someone has a low resolution than a high one when writing code, though.

> Flamebait like that hopefully has something to back it up. Easy setup isn't
> very compelling since any setup is inherently more difficult & time consuming
> than letting this run as is.

I think it does. It uses a similar threaded system. Its more graphicly simple by default, and therefore easier to load. It doesn't force you to use cookies. It was easy to maintain the boards... I had it running on a site I maintained at one point.

> > It does. If you are not logged in, Username and Password boxes are added to
> the
> > reply and post screens.
>
> Ah, well, that's good. But what if I'm on a computer lab at school? Won't a
> cookie be left there so that any putz who comes in and sits down can now post as
> me?

If you enter the login/password at the post screen, no, they will not be saved in cookies, password caches, or anywhere else on your end.
It does use temporary cookies to note what items you have read, but those dissappear once you close the browser. Not that it matters -- they don't say anything the history window couldn't tell you.

>
> > Poorly written HTML standards, actually. TEXTAREA tags must be given a specific
> > height and width. There is no 100% like tables have (that I know of, anyway).
>
> > I may reduce the default width to 60 at some point. In the mean time, if you do
> > use cookies, you can set the width and height in your profile.
>
> Ah, I see. I never did figure out how to write forms in html... it would be
> a much better idea to assume someone has a low resolution than a high one when
> writing code, though.

Fair enough. Width is now 60 (which should be fine even on 640x480 unless you use a REALLY big font).


> > Flamebait like that hopefully has something to back it up. Easy setup isn't
> > very compelling since any setup is inherently more difficult & time consuming
> > than letting this run as is.
>
> I think it does. It uses a similar threaded system. Its more graphicly
> simple by default, and therefore easier to load. It doesn't force you to use
> cookies. It was easy to maintain the boards... I had it running on a site I
> maintained at one point.

I did see a few interesting features. I have yet to find a system that really does what I want (just running 15 sites off one FastCGI process narrows the playing field), so I intend to merge them a bit.