By the way, those that read among the different forums, the quoted text isn't bold. It's just that it's 17.5 pixels big (it was 18.75px) that makes it bolder. However, if you add a [size /] tags to it resizing it back to e.g. 10, you'll see the text isn't bold.

Has anybody expressed any justification for making quoted text 17.5 px? I'd prefer it to be the same size as default body text like this, if that's OK with everybody else.

(and without that extra blank line afterwards, please)

By the way, those that read among the different forums, the quoted text isn't bold. It's just that it's 17.5 pixels big (it was 18.75px) that makes it bolder. However, if you add a [size /] tags to it resizing it back to e.g. 10, you'll see the text isn't bold.

Has anybody expressed any justification for making quoted text 17.5 px? I'd prefer it to be the same size as default body text like this, if that's OK with everybody else.

(and without that extra blank line afterwards, please)

Jord knew what posters meant by saying the quotes were bold. He is technically correct, in that the bold tag is not present. But the overblown size makes it appear so.

In any case, it looks like shouting, and is ridiculous.

Don't look now, but things just got worse. Somebody is playing again.
White text is now gray. On a slate background. Nice contrast there.
Much harder to read.

David Anderson, November 12, 2016 wrote:

Fonts etc.: we're using the Bootstrap default.
We can fiddle with this once everything else is working.

---

David Anderson, November 12, 2016 wrote:

Fonts etc.: we're using the Bootstrap default.
We can fiddle with this once everything else is working.

And the fiddler played while Rome burnt down...........

Because really, do you feel safe and sound in Facebook, Google or Windows (10) environments? Feel you can really constrain all the information you don't want getting out? For if not, why would you want all the rest of us to go use it then?

Yes and Yes to the first two questions (relative to here).

I did say "compare" meaning refer to the ease of use and flexibility of those modern forums. I did not suggest move to them specifically, but most mainstream software/services are likely to have some resources dedicated to securing it and is far less likely to have weaknesses. To think our little corner of the internet won't be attacked is naive, to adopt the lets get hacked then find a fix is a waste of resource. Boinc forums are still plagued with the 1990 script spam-bots auto generating bogus teams and accounts (last week).

A quick google (yes i feel safe using google) shows thousands of boards using open source software http://www.thebiggestboards.com/ all of which have better functionality than here.

The other card - "it's integrated" doesn't hold water either, as all of the major BBS provide good secure APIs to most databases. Look at myBB for example. https://mybb.com/

Found another one - when sending private messages, the preview label merges into the text without distinction, unlike when previewing a post here.

The stock server status page (like in Seti Beta) doesn't render nicely at widths ~770 to ~990. The left and right parts overlap each other.

Boinc forums are still plagued with the 1990 script spam-bots auto generating bogus teams and accounts (last week).

Spam on the internet didn't start until 1994, and was then done on Usenet. Might want to brush up on your history there.
Also, we - as in the BOINC forums - have a lot of spam accounts made as we have less defense against the spammers than the projects do. At least at the projects they can enforce that an account has credits and a RAC of more than 10 before they can make a profile, add an URL, add a signature even.

They have several other insurances that stop spammers in their tracks as well.
Yes, they can still make accounts, but they can't put spam into them. We don't have most of those luxuries, due to no credits & RAC. So here other things happen, in the background and the foreground.

If you're afraid of the accounts they make, those can get cleaned up quite easily as I understand. Just check if accounts have viable computers attached, and if not, remove those accounts. Can be done through a cron job.

The other card - "it's integrated" doesn't hold water either, as all of the major BBS provide good secure APIs to most databases. Look at myBB for example.

Bad example. My forum has been hacked help, Hacked! Every forum's worst fear, Recovering a Hacked Forum

---

Can be done through a cron job.

cron jobs... you shouldn't need those skills to maintain a modern BB forum .

Bad example. My forum has been hacked help, Hacked! Every forum's worst fear, Recovering a Hacked Forum

i should have used "1990s" in my post - thank you for the history lesson Ageless

Why is this a "Bad example"? i guess you found they (like any good service) have forum specifically for raising security issues "OMG I've been hacked" -That is a good feature, they have thousands of sites with millions of users - i'll leave the reader to research and find the exact number and post a correction.

How many "unhacked" forums are there? Hard to tell but it would number in the thousands to tens of thousands.

As you have highlighted three posts - lets look closer at them

The first link dates 2014. Someone called for help - it got answered and their site restored from backup a few hours later. Is that bad?

The second link - also 2014 - was an admin password compromise (you need to read it), which would cause any system a problem. There is a very good and sensible discussion from one of the myBB coders in that thread (post #14) - real coders engaging in the forums - is that bad?

The last link is what to do if you have a breach. Is that bad?

You might browse the release notes, planned release functionality, the development discussion forum. Is that bad?

Perhaps readers might look outside of this forum to see BB forums in general Forum reviews and here specifically Forum showcase

I say good example, in fact i say very good example compared to BOINC forum functionality.

If the site was taken down and then presented as a fait accompli - we'd moan even more I reckon. Even I might :)

But what we're part of is a work in progress. It is going to be impossible to please everyone in any move to future-proof things, but constructive pointers as to the difficulties we're experiencing, are much more likely to be listened to, so may be more productive in the long term I think.

Whatever changed between last time I was on the seti board (early hours of this morning) and now, I'm not too enamoured with however - and BOINC manager has twice suspended tasks due to cpu being busy when I opened drop down lists since it - which may be nothing to do with the site of course - but it's okay - I'll wait and see how things unfold. And it hasn't happened a third time, which is reassuring :)

Without - honestly - meaning to disparage David Anderson in any way, I think it's clear from the moment-by-moment changes at SETI that he wasn't, before this sequence of attempted changes, an experienced Bootstrap website designer. Provided he sticks with it, he will be one by the end of the exercise - one more string to his CV, and probably several more grey hairs as well. I hope that, having started, he does persevere to the end, because I actually quite like the direction the site is going in, and I think it shows promise - but the public teething troubles are painful.

Two learning points for developers anywhere.

1) When is it best to do the job yourself (learning on the job - even though you lack all the knowledge you might need when you start), and when is it best to hire in help who are already ahead of you in that particular sphere? (taken as a given that not every developer who puts themselves forward as an experienced practitioner is really as experienced as they claim to be - I suspect Einstein may have found themselves in that position)

2) When you develop something that's never been tried before (and I've been in that position myself), you can get away with almost anything: nobody has any prior expectations of you, and if it works at all, everyone is amazed and congratulates you. When the time comes for version 2, 3, 4, the expectations are already in place, and the world is much less forgiving. How much of the upgrade can you do in a private closed development, how much with a small-scale test environment, and how much in the full public view of your existing audience? How do you choose the right transition points between those stages?

Without - honestly - meaning to disparage David Anderson in any way, I think it's clear from the moment-by-moment changes at SETI that he wasn't, before this sequence of attempted changes, an experienced Bootstrap website designer. Provided he sticks with it, he will be one by the end of the exercise - one more string to his CV, and probably several more grey hairs as well. I hope that, having started, he does persevere to the end, because I actually quite like the direction the site is going in, and I think it shows promise - but the public teething troubles are painful.

Two learning points for developers anywhere.

1) When is it best to do the job yourself (learning on the job - even though you lack all the knowledge you might need when you start), and when is it best to hire in help who are already ahead of you in that particular sphere? (taken as a given that not every developer who puts themselves forward as an experienced practitioner is really as experienced as they claim to be - I suspect Einstein may have found themselves in that position)

2) When you develop something that's never been tried before (and I've been in that position myself), you can get away with almost anything: nobody has any prior expectations of you, and if it works at all, everyone is amazed and congratulates you. When the time comes for version 2, 3, 4, the expectations are already in place, and the world is much less forgiving. How much of the upgrade can you do in a private closed development, how much with a small-scale test environment, and how much in the full public view of your existing audience? How do you choose the right transition points between those stages?

If he had an iota of sense in developing software others will use, he would have completed all tests here. If that means he has to post some begs for people on other projects to come here and play to be sure every feature is exercised on every combination of O/S and browser, so be it. BOINC isn't M$ who can afford all those boxes to test upon. Then he has to read the feedback from the users, not the developers, no matter how painful and take it to heart and come up with what they want, which frequently isn't what the developer wants or what is easy to code! Finally as it seems there are color sets which can be picked WHY THE BLEEP CAN'T A USER PICK ONE THEY LIKE?!

Oh, now the "normal" size isn't normal. And if he has floating point sizes, BBCode only takes integers.

<ed>Finally whose bright idea was it to force every user to change their signatures which assumed white background to a different design suitable for a dark background? When do you release software that breaks legacy?

---

Serendipitously - and unconsciously - I find that my first sentence uses the words "Bootstrap website designer". Maybe the gap between that and "website developer" is wider than appears at first glance,

Jord posted a very important link earlier in the thread relating to the BOINC project governance, i wondered if anyone read it.

here and it lists who's who (sort of) and more importantly what the process for change is.

There is a typo or two in the Governance document, i've included some [words] which appear to be missing (on the version i see)- but it describes - quite clearly the actions of change and who is responsible.

Before saying people are owners or quasi owners, they should read the document.

The relevant parts are.

2.3 Committers
“Committers” are contributors who have shown, via a sequence of positive contributions, their value to the project. Committers are able to make changes directly, rather than by [the normal Contributor process in 2.2] Committers have no more authority over the project than contributors. Their work is visible to the community (e.g. in a commit history) and can be reviewed by the community. The key difference is that this review happens after the change is made, rather than before [] submitting patches.

Each committer will be associated with one or more “areas” of the project:
Software development and maintenance
Translation system
Testing and release management
Documentation
BOINC web site, including News items.
Support
Infrastructure (e.g. setting up and maintaining email lists and Github repository; maintaining BOINC web server).


Depending on the committer’s area(s), they will be given specific privileges such as:
Commit access to the source code repository.
Write access to the documentation Wikis.
Write access to the public web site.
Moderator status on project message boards.


Committers are expected to:
Read the communication channels relevant to their area(s).
Participate in the process of evaluating and committing patches in their area(s).

Section 4. Contribution processes

In all cases, contributors are expected to work as part of the community. For example:
Before submitting a software patch for a new feature, a contributor should discuss the feature and its implementation with the community.

Section 5. Decision processes

The committers in an area must also decide on development plans in that area – for example, whether and how a new feature will be implemented. These decisions should be made by consensus of the committers in that area, with review and discussion of the community as a whole.

It's not clear who are the committers are (note the plural) relating to the BOINC message boards but section 4 does set an expectation of discussion and communication with the community.

Not going to happen, Dr. A is an IT guy and Dr. K is an astronomer. Since you are so highly opinionated maybe you should become a Boinc developer.

DA doesn't realise that designer stubble went out in the 70's.

I am totally gobsmacked, what the hell does whether someone grows a beard or not has stubble or not have anything to do with this subject.

DA doesn't realise that designer stubble went out in the 70's.

I am totally gobsmacked, what the hell does whether someone grows a beard or not has stubble or not have anything to do with this subject.

I agree. These posts are getting more and more erratic, and less and less relevant. Chris, please take a break and a chill pill.

I don't have to be biased to ask why the way David Anderson keeps his beard has anything to do with this subject.

That is what I asked.

Why should I need a good nights sleep, my question will still be the same tomorrow.

Also could you explain how I am capable of "spoiling" your evening?

All I did was ask a question.

DA doesn't realise that designer stubble went out in the 70's.

I am totally gobsmacked, what the hell does whether someone grows a beard or not has stubble or not have anything to do with this subject.

I agree. These posts are getting more and more erratic, and less and less relevant. Chris, please take a break and a chill pill.

+many many chill pills.

---