+1

>>30021
I'd prefer 12 hour time with am and pm

>>30021
i'd like it to say "in the morning", "in the afternoon", "in the night time" after the AM/PM, eg
>13:15 PM in the afternoon
thank you

>>30021
Retard, you should have been aborted

>>30032
Great suggestion +1

Add dreamtime too.

>>30035
+1

>>30021
I oppose this suggestion to move to a base-24 system. Base 10 time would be the logical format. Its concerning that crazy niche interests have way too much influence over day to day governance over us all.

>>30037
>base
modulo

There is a user option at the bottom of the page to use local time.
Perhaps this could be rolled into the local time user option.

I have no personal view on this

Monk would have this implemented by now.

>>30040
👆 💯

It would be helpful if the list of board bans was separated into pages, indexed or could be filtered in some way.with thousands of accumulated bans, the page doesn't load correctly, and there's no sensible way of managing the list.

I would also suggest the MD5 hash bans be stored server side and available only on request. This data is prone to abuse and unauthorised dissemination.

It would probably be helpful if the moderation actions panel allowed concurrent action. Eg. Can delete a post, ban a user, hashban an image in one action. Maybe I'm just too dumb to work out how to do this, but we need to be able to clean up offending posts as fast as they're made to beat persistent human spammers.

We may also want a md5 utility to generate related hashes, to deter some of the cruder forms of hash ban evasion, nearly all of which are associated with pizza spam.

Also shout out to Pariston for removing so many vile posts, you have my axe

>>30021
Fantastic. Great move. Well done NEET.

>>30067
First is reasonable and passed it on.

Second that's what's happening hash bans are stored server side. Not sure how to store otherwise. Maybe I just don't understand the suggestion, so elaborate.

Third I got the reply that that's how it works. I know it's don't, but the end result is that it won't change. You could have a userscript that fills the ban form tho and maybe a button that issue the ban and deletes the post. But it's better to mass select specific posts based on characteristics. Or reverse select. Or mass select then opt out on those that looks false selection. Or make not of posts that should be ignore, or mass select based on characteristics after nth post or timestamp, etc.

Last one. We have experience with perceptual hashing (others call it fuzzy hashing), 9chan even had perceptual hash banning feature. We even have a tool that can search for similar pics. There are two problems:
1. cant adapt the engine to it, or can't adapt it to the engine (so our tool is just a standalone stuff)
2. perceptual hashing is only useful from liek 2 steps away from the orignal, by the 3rd step it starts to match widely different images, and by the 10th it's basically any pictures I can't even guess why that was picked as "similar". So lots of false positives. And this was our xp with the phash ban on 9 too.

>>30070
I see, thank you for your response.
So would it be a fair assessment to say that because external utilities are widely relied on, the associated data remains accessible from the Web side?

>>30072
What are you implying?

If you don't want to write it here just dance around the topic you can send it in email if that's better.

>02:45am in the morning
Isn't that such a great timestamp. It is clear what time it is.

>>30088
I support this idea.