Spudinski

Not really. It's been some time since I've worked with ezRPG, but as far as I can remember, there's no need to protect against it with ezRPG. The web has changed a lot since CSRF was a "big thing", and tactics used with CSRF attacks are becoming outdated. I personally don't protect against CSRF, mainly because I don't use blatantly insecure methods of authentication. I don't think ezRPG has flaws such as that either.

Most amusing.

Not really. People who generally create games are youngsters(<16) and aren't able enough to understand ezRPG. All other's would be professional, and would use in-house developers. There's exceptions, but if you understand how to develop with ezRPG, you would create your own customizations.

Oh god... I suggest you don't consider a career in anything computer related... ever.

Quote on a medium application, featuring three APIs/web-services(REST) and two incoming channels(SFTP and SSH) from other? Hosts ~400 databases(excluding config), about 3k independent scripts(~10 per account) and ~1.5k app specific(excluding libs). I've always been interested in seeing how someone would "black box" test this... Note: Yes, I'm actually serious.

Yes, it's duly licensed. The addition to the MIT license will allow you to append your own license to the content modified. jQuery's Javascript so the learning curve is much easier if one already knows Javascript. Nothing changes w.r.t. the way that onewould normally write Javascript, only the addition is of a framework that is used.

Google told me I can't spell...

This is off topic... But where's Nyna's CDIR script? Anyone have it?

Well, websites still not using Ajax functionality where possible is either created by lazy developers or people who don't quite understand Ajax. Ajax accounts for 30% of my Javascript headaches, but if it were to be natively implemented it would take weeks or months to create a proper Ajax application. Also, jQuery(and other frameworks alike) was made for a reason... it seems to me that most people still don't quite understand why. The web is dynamic, browsers are inconsistent and most of all Javascript is an art to master. Unlike PHP or most other interpreted languages, there is no "one" way Javascript is executed in the browser. In Chrome(V8 engine) Javascript is compiled into machine code and then executed, others interpret and some execute bytecode. Let's take a simple example, IE vs Every other browser on earth - Round one: substr. In every language I've ever programmed in, the following will return the last character of the string "t"(rewritten to specific syntax): "Javascript".substr(-1, 1) In IE the function returns the first character, the simple answer is that the implementation of substr is so different with IE in such a way that if the first parameter of substr is a negative integer it interprets a string, i.e. the resulting code in other browsers will be: "Javascript".substr(0, 1) // J   That was a *very* simple example, and it's something not a lot of people know about. But... when you actually learn(instead of use) Javascript, these are vital things you need to know about. Sure one could write hacks all over, and even write a class to replace all native functions to function the same in all browsers, but that would be a damn mission. What jQuery(and others alike) attempts to do, is solve these issues by creating something called a framework. In my mind only fools try to reinvent the wheel. On to Ajax then... $.ajax v.s. XMLHttpRequest. Wait, old IE doesn't support this. $.ajax v.s. ActiveXObject("Msxml2.XMLHTTP"). Wait, new IE doesn't support this. $.ajax v.s. ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP") Wait, no other browser on earth supports this. $.ajax vs $.ajax. Every major browser supports this. See what I did there? But that's not the only reason to use a framework'd Ajax implementation. Things like caching, callbacks, encodings, data formats, request formats, etc. are all pretty damn neat features. And I would put money on that if anyone were to develop something that features all of that, they would probably mess it up somehow. Now compare all this, to - I just know you people are going to contradict me with it, so here - a ~100KB size framework. Something you don't have to push into a repo and maintain, something that just always works whenever you use it. There's a place to use native Javascript, but I do not believe Ajax is such an occasion. Note: This post was not directed at anyone - I'm just rambling on about my love of Javascript.

Chrome is more than up to par with Firebug. Chrome actually has the advantage of being able to directly communicate with the Javascript V8 engine. There's a lot of tutorials out there to guide on usage of debugging tools.

I made a mod some time ago that can be easily be adjusted to do what you require. Have a look here: http://makewebgames.io/showthread.php/23619-Guess-Who!

Firstly, wrap quotes around URLs when using them within a CSS property, it helps a lot when debugging later. Secondly, although your CSS selector looks valid I suggest you add an !important flag. You can read more about CSS precedence here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/667223/css-precedence. As for the !important flag, how a look at the following to see how the !important is used in CSS: http://coding.smashingmagazine.com/2010/11/02/the-important-css-declaration-how-and-when-to-use-it/.

1. About the obsessive posting was to inform you guys of an idiotic permissions failure. 2. It's was four post exactly, not twenty. 3. You still didn't answer my question, none of what you said applies to me. 4. Within the first paragraph you hint towards my removal, spon again? Edit: I find it rather amusing that DJk has a post that you *deleted* in his signature. Even Nickson have said similar things, is it just a_bertrand that on a spree? Edit 2: I think a_b is getting full of himself, and I don't like being someone's bitch i.t.o. complying to what they *think* is correct(go read your own god-damn rules before trying to preach them to people again). I hope staff's response is appropriate, else I foresee my future posting habits being redirected towards a community with a "set" of staff that is more competent(again, generalizing). I'm not going to stand here and be humiliated by moronic and self-righteous staff.

No one post.

Dear Staff, I bet you guys *think* you're so damn clever. I also bet you guys *think* you're doing everyone one big ass favour. You're not, so cut it out. A little philosophy on this matter: My posts are my opinion, whomever disagrees with it is *their* problem not *mine*. Deleting *my* posts is ridiculous, and you guys should really rethink your strategy w.r.t. moderation on this forum. My posts are meaningful, formatted, well communicated and even funny at times. Yet every second post I make to this forum is deleted? Why. Many people's posts on here should be deleted, they're meaningless and just plain retarded. Yet the posts stay? Why. Deleting my posts pisses me off, indescribably. And I've communicated this issue with staff. If you don't want my content, please inform me as such and I'll stop presenting it. I apologize for those few staff members that do actually try and make an effort, but since I'd sound like a complete "curmudgeon" for naming specific people, I'm generalizing. S.

Strings... You need to enclose them in SQL, i.e. 'I am a string'. Single or double quotes, doesn't matter. You see, the problem with you query is... to break it down: UPDATE users SET jailreason=$jailreason WHERE userid=$userid   First, MySQL attempts to update the `jailreason` column, but since there's no value for it, it fails. Effectively, your query parses as: UPDATE users SET jailreason=I am a string WHERE userid=55490    

Pictures always win... :\

Well, if I can inform anyone interested... This website will eventually be known as a clone/copy/pirate of the original website. Further more, links on the site may be blacklisted by major SEs. Google detects websites like these, as a form of protection against typo's. Searching for this website will even be corrected to the original website.

Look at what these fools said...          

Any recommendations? :P

Here's my input of how I see communication on MWG: If you have a problem with what someone says in a thread, do not post it as it will be deleted - use the ignore feature. If someone tells you they have a problem with you, depending on how good an ass kisser you are - use the ignore feature. If you want to ask someone something, use the PM feature to request an alternative method of contact. If someone want to ask you something, redirect them to your contact details via PM. And finally.... If you want to talk gibberish, use the "Post" feature.

Wordpad will.

You can not ban people over an personal opinion, though you deem it necessary in you own eyes. The matter of "innocent until proven guilty" applies to everyone on these boards, and should be respected. In this specific case, just because the OP was ...., one can not automatically assume the other party as being the guilty one. For instance, I've known Cronus as an acquaintance since way back when, I have him on messenger as well, and I know he isn't the type of person to act, or even speak, as indicated by the OP's conversational log.

Actually, that's PHP.. @S.Cosmin: Find your .htaccess file, and add the following: php_value error_reporting 1927 # or 2039 This will only show: E_ERROR, E_WARNING, E_PARSE, E_USER_ERROR, E_USER_WARNING and E_USER_NOTICE error types.

An engine in modern days needs to be a platform, in my eyes anyway. There are tons of frameworks out there to do anything you can think of. A well written engine should be the core(or base) that communicates with different frameworks. Because, a framework is just that, a frame to house libraries in, nothing more, it doesn't offer abstraction between different players within an application. Although an engine in older days was not referenced to having any aspect of "design" or "look and feel", for modern engines it's a requirement, unless it's only set out to perform one task - a templating engine is an example hereof. Pre-calculated content is also a must, as it defines usage to clients. An example of this can be a script looking for specific input, and generating a predetermined output. If a client doesn't know the input, the output may be scrambled. The same logic applies to software, and the same reason 100% of software have default configurations. Features I would look for when buying an engine: - Scalability - Abstraction - Modularity - Integrity(or the ability to keep) - Security Features I look for when buying any software: - Design - User-friendliness - User-interaction control(able to disable interaction with me or syslogs) - Configurable - Reputability