Hide website link for accounts under ten days old

[cmho]

CODE TOUR: To help discourage spammers from registering accounts here, we want to hide the website link on the profile to other users until the account is ten days old, and display a message telling the logged-in user why it's not displaying yet.

Closes #2795.

[kareila]

This is a good start, but it doesn't entirely meet the requested spec. Just at a glance:

• it seems to show the "your profile" message to everyone who views the profile, not just the journal owner?
• it should still show the actual link to logged-in users with suspend privileges.

[cmho]

@kareila I think this should hit all the requirements now?

[kareila]

Okay, deep breaths. This is like, 70% of the way there! You're doing great.

I am going to break this review into three segments.

my $spam_time_threshold = scalar (localtime() - (ONE_DAY * 10)) <= scalar LJ::mysql_time( $u->timecreate );

^^ This line gave me an error: Argument "2022-10-18 22:31:21" isn't numeric in localtime

I spent half an hour trying different variations on this to get the right output, so you don't have to. Here's what I ended up with:

my $spam_time_threshold = (DateTime->now->epoch - (ONE_DAY * 10)) > $u->timecreate;

Notice I reversed the direction of the comparison, because the link will display normally if the expression is true.

if ($remote->has_priv('suspend') || $spam_time_threshold) {

If the page is being viewed logged out, this will fail because $remote will be unset. Also, you've already calculated $spam_time_threshold, and we expect it to usually be true, so it makes sense to check that first. So here's the way I recommend rewriting that:

if ( $spam_time_threshold || ( $remote && $remote->has_priv('suspend') ) ) {

As written, the "Other people will not see this link..." message will always display to the user if their account is less than 10 days old, but I think we only want to display it if the user has saved a URL. So I would move all this back into the if ($url) { conditional - the first one, line 527 in the original file.

... Phew, I think that's everything! Thanks for hanging in there <3

[alierak]

For what it's worth, I'd never heard of DateTime->now->epoch, so I checked what it does, and it's equivalent to just "time", as in my $spam_time_threshold = (time - (ONE_DAY * 10)) > $u->timecreate;

[cmho]

ok i thiiiiink that should do it (also tbh don't worry about the big paragraph of feedback; this is still fewer comments than i get from work lmao and that's in a language i'm good at)

[kareila]

For what it's worth, I'd never heard of DateTime->now->epoch, so I checked what it does, and it's equivalent to just "time", as in my $spam_time_threshold = (time - (ONE_DAY * 10)) > $u->timecreate;

Well sure, and ONE_DAY * 10 is equivalent to 864000, but there's an argument to be made that there are times when a bit of additional complexity makes the code's intent clearer to the casual observer.

[kareila]

Okay, three things:

1. The direction of the inequality in the time comparison row is still backwards from what I think it should be. Have you tested it?
2. This backs out the change from Be slightly more lenient about removing HTML links from userbios #3212
3. Please, please, please tidy your code changes before submitting.