What you're talking about sounds like "Single sign-on" (sharing the same userbase across multiple forums) which, I think, is a different prospect altogether; what IPS are doing is making the "community" the top-level application with a *single* forum, gallery, blog, store, etc. underneath it - as opposed to the "community" app supporting multiple *same* child apps.
The change means that you no longer *have* to use forums, you can just run blogs on their own, or have a shop (without forums) - but still only a single instance.
If you want multiple forums, shops, blog sites, etc. you'll still need a community licence and product license for each site.
Of course I defer to the IP staff if I've got it wrong ... :)
You don't have to be actively "in" the chat room to be able to moderate it. You can log ALL of the chat and then review the logs if you get complaints (Admin [or any approved moderators] can login to the Admin Control Panel and search through the chat logs).
That's how we used to do it on CycleChat. If we then found someone had abused the chat facility we would remove their ability to access it.
It is very difficult to moderate chat on a "live" basis - you would need round-the-clock supervision - which, in reality, isn't always practical.
It's a good chat system though - have you tried the IPS demo? or maybe even tried it here on the IPS community site?
When CycleChat was on IP.Board 3.1.4 I used Sphinx for search and it made a good job of speeding up search results, but as someone who uses ES with XF I would second your suggestion for an add-on for IPS.
It's not a solution that most small sites would need (or even want) so an add-on would be the best way to provide it. The instant injection of content data, fast speed, and small resource footprint of ES (combined with the reduction in MySQL overhead because it's not being used for fulltext searching - something it's not good at once you pass 1 million records) would be great for larger sites - and with the ability to use stemming in searches it makes a big difference to relevance.
I'm not plugging my XF board, but just offering it as a "live" example of a site with 1.7+ million posts using ES for search (on a 4 year old Debian server with 8GB RAM): www.cyclechat.net
Judge for yourself whether you feel it is fast/relevant or not?
Just something that is a personal niggle really, but may be a similar issue for others: the two search boxes at the top-right of the IPS community forums - one for the forums, and a second one below for the Resources.
Resources can be selected in the forums search box so why have a second one below?
I've regularly entered a search query into the Resources box by accident - so how about removing the resources search, or perhaps flip the Resources search box so it is on the left side, with the links on the right? This way there won't be a visual cross-over between the two search boxes.
I suspect this is related to the recent changes to the community - I believe "lifetime" license holders and those who are secondary contacts on an account are now treat differently in terms of permissions and what you can access.
Yes, you can still use the software without having to renew.
Renewal gives you the extra benefits of support and access to the latest downloads, but if you have the software installed and running you do not need to maintain an "active" license to be able to continue using it.
MW3 - PC for me - it's my birthday this coming weekend so Steam will be getting a hammering from my ADSL connection ... :D
I don't have a great deal of free time for gaming but enjoy it when I do. I'm currently working my way through the Prestige levels of Black ops - but that might go on the back-burner once I get MW3. :grin:
I think it could be done better next time; I'm thinking in particular about 3.1.4 --> 3.2.0
The communication of removals was done through the various blog entries and spotted around a number of threads during the 3.2 development (which went on for months) - very handy for anyone who followed the development keenly, but not much use for anyone who didn't.
It meant that the "removals / change" list was disparate and anyone coming at 3.2 without reading all the announcements, blog entries, and threads - would be doing so somewhat blindly.
At release / upgrade time it lead to a good number of people rushing back to complain that x, y, and z feature were no longer present - because they hadn't been advised, specifically, before the upgrade, that upgrading to 3.2 would impact on x, y, or z.
A couple of things could have helped: A list of removed features/options in the 3.2 release announcement
A warning in the upgrade routine advising of the changes/differences before you pressed the button - perhaps with a link back to the removals notice in the release announcement
I don't think IPS should continue to hold on to (and support) outmoded features, but there is probably more that could be done to better communicate those changes to all of their customer base and not just the ones that regularly participate in the forums here.