There is currently no preview in IPS4 as the editor is a true WYSIWYG -- content gets parsed in real-time and what you see is what's inserted into the database. There is no BBCode in IPS4, so there's really nothing left to preview.
These were/are actually rank titles that get assigned based on the number of posts. Jay used to work at IPS and at one point, it seemed like he commented on literally every topic - so "Meet Jay" was an inside joke for "Posts a lot." Member titles can be updated after a certain number of posts (I don't know off-hand what that's set to here) and if none is chosen, the defaults apply.
@Kevin Carwile - I love the idea - great work and thank you for the contribution. @Joel R - Accommodating the infinite ways people could possibly use the suite is absolutely noble in concept, but the reality is, even attempting to reach that lofty goal would mean overwhelming the product to the point of alienating the majority of clients. You noted yourself we've accomplished the task of creating the framework and you've noted you agree with the default method. At that point, rather than adding another page of toggles and code hooks for "count this, but don't count that" for the benefit of what seems to be a relative few, it makes sense to let the marketplace do its job as necessary and good folks like Kevin take over. That said, we can close by saying we can agree easily accessible app-specific counts would be useful. It's in our internal system now and is something we will work on. We will agree to disagree on the benefit of changing how the global content counter works and artificially modifying it. I suspect that in the end, you'll be able to leverage app counters if you wish, but the global counter is just that -- global. Hopefully we can move on to the next thing now. I never knew post counts could be so flustering.
I suppose you're correct, Craig - I'm not understanding where you're coming from on this particular issue. I don't know why you'd want to "reward" people for using the forums app, but essentially penalize them for using the gallery. It seems the end-goal is to keep people on your community and engaged, regardless of how they choose to do so. Nonetheless, you're absolutely free to do as you wish with your community and we're not against the idea, it just hadn't occurred to us - the fact that only forum posts counted in IP.Board was an oversight more than a feature. If more feel like you, it's important to speak up... we'll listen if there's genuine interest as was the case with topic titles in which people were quite vocal and made quite valid points. As mentioned, we'll do what we can by considering isolated per member per app contributions. I'm unsure that would be added by final, but adding such a thing to a member profile would be a few minute thing for a marketplace guru.
It's clear this is a very important issue for you and I'm sorry we don't have an out of the box and immediate solution. You might ask " how can you then reward someone for contributing 10 images to the gallery, 10 download files 100 posts in the forum when the content count is all inclusive and not differentiated?" I would ask, why would you want to encourage members to ignore parts of your site in favor of another and if you would, I have to strongly believe you'd be in the overall minority. We're very open to changing it, but we need more than one "vote" to make that happen. Unfortunately, I think you're misunderstanding the objective of IPS4. We recognize that ALL of our customers currently use the forums app. Conversely, we also recognize that not all customers care only about the forums. The goal of IPS4 is to break the disconnect between the apps. As with any change, it's sure to alienate a few - but this is the direction we're taking and the feedback on the whole is overwhelmingly positive. I don't think it would be difficult to offer a breakdown of stats per app if that's desired. We'll give that some further consideration. Please understand - we're not being difficult, but everyone has their minor thing that's a big thing to them. If we added everything that was important to everyone -- even everything from IP.Board on top of what's new in IPS4, we'd be left with a gigantic mess. It's not unlike building a car -- some insist on mud guards; some can't stand them and hate the look. Auto manufacturers then need to decide what is going to appeal to the most customers possible and then leave the rest to the aftermarket, otherwise, you're going to have a vehicle so overwhelming that nobody will want it. To you, it's major deal-breaking functionality. To the next 10 people, it's going to be "why would I want that anyway?" It's our job to parse that out into tangible action items. We're not always perfect at it and we rely heavily on all mediums of feedback, but it's a daunting task.
We've not made any decision and we said we'd be open to suggestions, but you've not provided feedback that would indicate you're not in the overwhelming minority. It seems to us that most would consider content to be content, whether it's a forum post or a gallery image. Clearly you want to isolate counts and we're not opposed to that per se if that's what the majority would like, but we're not going to go down the path of bloating the product with all sorts of little triggers and options based on how a select few previously used the software. It may seem like a "small request" - but consider the real scope of that. We have to go to each entry/submission point in each app, add a hook to check whether we want to increment the count, then add settings for them, then the interface. Is it a week long project? No. Is it worth doing? Well, we're open to more feedback, but thus far - no. To be honest, I'm not sure why you wouldn't use reputation for member rewards - that's the premise of the system vs an arbitrary post count that can easily be inflated with inane ramblings. As you mentioned though, it is your community to manage as you wish according to your specific needs. Likewise, while you license the software, it is still our software to tailor to the interests of the client base at large. It would get pretty overwhelming pretty quickly (and IP.Board was on its way) if we added a setting for this, a setting for that, a page for this, a page for that all based on everyone's individual needs. We have to be somewhat realistic, I'm afraid and draw the line. If there's mass interest, we'll do it. Otherwise, I'm sure we can work out another solution such as providing app specific counts at some point. Doing a count on app content would be a very easy hook to do as well for someone in the marketplace.
Deceptive? Almost every single IPS staff member and employee started as an IPS customer and many are still active users of the software. So even staff have opinions and feedback as customers and thus many still maintain their customer accounts. It's not unlike other professions.. When a police officer, for example, takes their uniform off at the end of the day, they're still normal citizens with their own voice irrespective of the department they represent "during the day" and it's important not to confuse others by inadvertently representing something as official when it's not. :)
You're right -- many are centered around the forums, but many don't want that to be the case anymore. I don't want to speak for @CheersnGears - but his site seems to largely revolve around IP.Content (now Pages) and I'd bet it's been a struggle to work around the confines of IP.Board wanting to have its way as the true core. In IPS4, you don't even need the forums app and even if you want it, it doesn't have to be the centerpiece that all content revolves around. There's many that do "just forums." We decided to break away from that in the sense that while there's still a strong market for forums, it's not a sustainable market for IPS if that's all we were to do and focus on. Most come to IPS for the suite these days and that's what we're going to focus on a complete and true community solution. It will, however, take some time for longtime users to adapt but if we stop seeing "forums" and see "community" (even if the forums app is the only app you have) - I feel it will make better sense. That said, remember, IP.Board isn't dead. If your site is more suited for IPB 3.4 then there's really no reason to upgrade right away - though we're only going to do critical updates for IP.Board.