Added feature that adds a flag icon to all replies that contain curse words

[RyanChernoff]

Context:
The current model is to treat thread owners as teachers and repliers as students. Therefore, it is important that teachers have tools to moderate their threads. A simple tool to accomplish this is a flagging feature on inappropriate content. This feature is able to analyze any new reply in a thread and test weather or not contains any banned words. Similarly, students shouldn't be able to update their messages to circumvent the flag so replies are rescanned on edit. Lastly, the teacher needs some way to recognize any flagged messages so an icon gets added to all flagged replies. Lastly, replies that are made as threads both avoid the flag feature (as they are in a new thread) but also undermine the priority model. Therefore, this feature has been removed. Together this creates a useful tool for teachers in moderating their students.

Description:
The content of every new post is run through a small script that checks if any single word in the post is a curse word. The contentFlag attribute is added and set to true on any post found to contain one of these words. Whenever the content is changed this script is run again and the attribute updated. A small orange flag icon is added to all replies that have their contentFlag attribute set to true. The reply as topic feature button was removed from the front end. Functions that extend functionality to the button were also removed.

Major Changes:

• Added flag function to search through replies
• Call flag function and add flagContent attribute on truthy return on reply creation
• Call flag function and update flagContent attribute on post edit
• Add flag icon to all replies with true flagContent attribute
• Removed reply as topic feature

File Changes:

src/posts/flagContent.js:

• Added banned words list consisting of curse words in hex
• Added flagContent function to search through a string for any words in banned words list

src/topics/create.js:

• Run flagContent on new replies in the Topics.reply function
• Add flagContent attribute if flagContent function returns true

src/posts/create.js

• Extract flagContent attribute from input if exists
• Forward flagContent attribute to the new post in the Posts.create function

src/posts/edit.js:

• Rerun flagContent on edited replies where content was changed in getEditPostData function

nodebb-theme-harmony/templates/partials/topic/reply-button.tpl:

• Removed the reply as topic button from the front end

public/src/client/topic/postTools.js:

• Removed onClick event from reply as thread button

nodebb-theme-harmony/templates/partials/topic/post.tpl:

• Added flag icon to replies with true flagContent attribute

Testing:
Testing was completed through the coverage suit and lint tests as well as some manual testing locally by creating and editing replies both with and without banned words. Users can simulate this by creating a reply to a thread with a curse word such as the F word.

Screenshot of Feature:

Resolves #8 and all of its sub issues (#13 & #14)

[kmakarska]

Overall code LGTM!

A few things about the PR description:

• Make sure to review this document the professor sent about best practice in PRs
• I think it would really help to follow those bullet points line by line and add headings for them for the most descriptive PRs

Some specific feedback on your description:

• "Good PRs usually include bulleted lists of changes done to specific functions/ files. List the major changes made in this pull request." -> yours did not include a bulleted list which made it difficult to read
• "This is where including file paths along with changes made in each file could deem very useful" --> yours did not include file paths
• Although you touched on your testing methods, I think you could be a little clearer on "describe how the feature can be tested/noticed by a user, (Screenshots would be helpful)"

[jonassoh]

Looks good! Code is clear and easy to understand. The changes to the PR made it much easier to read and the commit messages are very clear and descriptive.

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 13247395746

Warning: This coverage report may be inaccurate.

This pull request's base commit is no longer the HEAD commit of its target branch. This means it includes changes from outside the original pull request, including, potentially, unrelated coverage changes.

• For more information on this, see Tracking coverage changes with pull request builds.
• To avoid this issue with future PRs, see these Recommended CI Configurations.
• For a quick fix, rebase this PR at GitHub. Your next report should be accurate.

Details

• 10 of 10 (100.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 4 files are covered.
• No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
• Overall coverage increased (+0.006%) to 82.677%

---

Totals
Change from base Build 12997714559:	0.006%
Covered Lines:	22333
Relevant Lines:	25592

---

💛 - Coveralls