IPS Management
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Lindy

  • Rank
    Bigger than Bigger
  • Birthday February 03

Contact Methods

Profile Information

  • Gender Male
  • Location Forest, VA

Recent Profile Visitors

89,756 profile views

Lindy's Activity

  1. Lindy added a post in a topic: Image setting options are TOO minimal.   

    We're not opposed to adding additional settings as needed and it seems apparent further review is needed, so I will open an internal item on it. It seems like the number of images per submission is the biggest concern? 
    If your site is image-centric, many large image intense sites will store the images on something like S3 and/or deliver via something like Cloudfront. IPS4 makes this really easy and a CDN is pretty much a must-have for a serious image community. 
  2. Lindy added a post in a topic: Relevancy search is not relevant... please set default to Date, look at these results...   

    Search is one of the very first things to be addressed immediately after final.
  3. Lindy added a post in a topic: Post count   

    The content count will remain as a global count, but we will be adding per-app counts to the profile. 
  4. Lindy added a post in a topic: [Missing] Birthday in registration screen   

    The intent is to add it to the registration settings. This will not be done before final as we're feature frozen.
  5. Lindy added a post in a topic: Followers Are Superior To Friends   

    I thought you were on hiatus, esquire. I feel like my posts are becoming esquire-esque in length and substance.
    I'd first caution against confusing  my  opinion with that of all that represents IPS. From a product standpoint, no one person makes decisions and we do not let our own egos shape the product against the grain. In fact, there's several things that I would personally do different in the suite if I could, but they prove to be in contrast to the expectations of most others. Products are shaped according to our customers' needs... and by that, I mean not just the most vocal customers, but the customers we "visit" throughout the course of our day for support, sales and follow-up as well as those whose feedback we obtain from here. You guys seem to think we have no idea what we're talking about here and we work in a vacuum because our views don't always line up. We might not fit your  current needs perfectly, but perhaps your needs don't necessarily represent the tens of thousands of others we're trying to meet. That doesn't lessen or take away from your feedback, but please, genuinely consider the above and trust that we haven't just been beating our heads on the walls for the past 13yrs and actually might have what resembles a clue... and if not, you can at least tell us "told you so."   
    I'll repeat again... we never had a "friends system" - we had a "friends list" that again, essentially served no purpose other than to seemingly recognize relationships via an entry in the database. Admittedly, we underestimated how seriously a few people take the ability to require approval to be listed as a "friend" and I'm sorry for that frustration. The point remains, you're asking for all new functionality or to bring back an arbitrary list (I'm sure we could do that with a hook, if really desired.) 
    Please also remember that in this industry, nothing is ever set in stone. We've said many times over that IPS4 was all about creating a new platform with a baseline approach that can quickly evolve and adapt to market needs and trends. I have never, to-date said we will not add a friends option and in fact, have repeatedly asked for folks to elaborate on what you envision an actual friends system to be. The desire to create a private clone of Instagram, Facebook, Google and LinkedIn is at least a tangible reason, though I'm not sure how actionable. I'd remind you, those services all exist independently for a reason.  
    To be clear, I think we all agree on the desire for a powerful turnkey community solution that allows you to share all forms of content and engage with others. I think we disagree in your contention that end-users should be able to treat the site as a personal repository in which they can pick and choose who sees their blog entries or status updates or posts. That , in my personal opinion (and I stress that) is against the very premise of a community and you're once again full circle back to private social media and reinventing the wheel. You're clearly saying "IPS, why do you care, give us the option and let us worry about whether it's a silly idea or not!" That's a very fair-enough question/statement to make when you have a limited focus of what you want from the software. From the perspective of those who have to develop and support these ideas for the benefit of the masses, all angles need to be considered and represented. "Friends" didn't make the cut in IPS4 because it didn't fit the current scope of IPS4. It didn't do anything (and for Cheers' benefit, anything that can't be done in IPS4) and it was far more popularly requested to create a system in which one can follow another's content without the facade of "friendship" than to create a private replication of all social media networks in one or an arbitrary, non-functional list. Further, having both or a toggle without enough differentiation would just be utterly confusing to the user and as with anything, more confusion is more support overhead and end-user frustration. 
    For what it's worth, there are hundreds of sites cited in your examples that already use the software. Mental health support, nightclubs, escort sites, you name it. Some have private VIP areas with permission masks, some have admin-approved registrations, some have access to more areas the more they participate, etc. It's generally accepted that if you're a part of a community, what you post is accessible to other members of that community and if the admin so chooses, to others outside of the community. In reference to Gallery, private albums were initially not in IPS4. It was a material feature in IP.Board and during the focus group and preview stages, there was a strong demand to bring them back -- so we did. 
    There are immediate plans to improve upon the follower system (and I personally like the "bond" suggestion made by another customer for mutual followers.) There are overall plans to significantly improve social engagement. Whether these will include plans of a "friends" system is an unknown and will largely depend on what functionality could be tied to it. I for one don't envision the suite taking a direction in which an end-user, can say "I ONLY want my best friends to see my blog entries" -- but you never know. If that's the direction the user base takes us, that's where we'll go! I can tell you that at the moment, that's seemingly not what most want and thus the development and support time expended would have little gain and unnecessarily add to the software. 
    I'll reiterate again, we're not done here yet and never will be. IPS4 is not a refactor of IP.Board - it's a new product line that will continue to evolve and mature. We've had an overwhelming sales response to IPS4, even in RC stages, but we understand some that grew very accustomed to the way IP.Board did certain things may have some, at least initial, hesitation or disappointment. Conversely, many are and will be excited about the flow of other areas and the new functionality and features. I would  love  to be something to everyone, but we can't and frankly, we're not going to pretend to try. At this point, I can only ask that you trust once we're over the initial release and stability hurdle, you will see marked advancement of the suite. It may not be entirely and perfectly suited to your every need (what is?) - but you certainly won't be able to say nothing is happening. In the interim, IP.Board/Blog/Gallery/Content/etc. still exists, is stable, fully supported, we still patch it and it seems it's fitting your needs relatively well -- there's no immediate need to upgrade, so why not relax and later revisit IPS4 to see if IPS is the right fit? 
  6. Lindy added a post in a topic: IPS under DOS Attack?   

    Are you using an ad blocker? If so, please try whitelisting this site -- the mitigation will challenge suspect requests via javascript and if it doesn't get a response and/or the captcha isn't answered, it will temporarily block you as a suspected bot. 
    We don't serve any advertisements here, as you know - so whitelisting the site shouldn't be an issue. 
    Unfortunately, until the perpetual attacks subside, we're using a bit more aggressive profile for mitigation. It shouldn't impact most normal users. 
    Thanks for your patience -- sorry for the inconvenience. 
  7. Lindy added a post in a topic: European Union cookie law. Yes another topic!   

    ​We are in fact reviewing all of this for Commerce. 
  8. Lindy added a post in a topic: Followers Are Superior To Friends   

    I think you're off the mark on this one, Woodsman. All along, you've been referring to the philosophical meaning of friends and detesting followers while saying you've made "some darn good friends" through the community and wanted that list of said friends maintained. That's unfortunately not a reason for adding or maintaining a feature and I think other members were not mocking you, but instead calling you out on the perceived lack of substance for your feedback and asking for more... such as what CheersnGears has provided. There's many things this community has, but an overabundance of silence is likely not one of them.
    It's perfectly natural for one to consider their opinion so sound that it's unfathomable to imagine any rational person having a differing opinion on a particular subject. To a conservative, it's mind boggling how someone could actually follow liberal principles -- and vice-versa. It's sheer human nature and there's nothing inherently wrong with it until we don't know when to say enough is enough and accept differing viewpoints. 
    In this case -- we're not developing Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn and Google+ --- what do every single one of those services have in common? They're all geared primarily, if not entirely, around the user, not your content and not the community as a whole. CheersnGears - for what it's worth, you can still (as an end-user) create albums specific to certain people. I believe I've seen you mention losing traffic to Facebook and the forums becoming less of an interest; I'm not trying to tell you how to run your community, but perhaps the "recreate private social network" philosophy is, with all due respect, a reason why. If your site becomes about cliques and private content (I'm not suggesting it is) -- what's the incentive for remaining on it when virtually everyone already has Facebook if they want to privately converse and share general things with "friends?" I'm personally a believer in fully  leveraging  social networks, not duplicating them. This  appears  to be what interests the majority of customers as well... All? No. Not everyone runs their community the same way, but if we tried to accommodate every unique need and desire while recreating Instagram, Youtube, Facebook and Google all bundled into one suite - we'd have to distribute the software on DVDs and it would require a beowulf cluster to operate.  
    We absolutely have great plans for far greater social features and gamification, but remember that the heart of what we do is communities. We provide a means for you to take an interest or purpose and share it with others and allow them to share their contributions or otherwise interact with you and other community members in return. I completely get that some want a subset of features that allows a virtual clubhouse of sorts for select friends and we may very well do things like social groups, but our job is to establish a baseline for the software that works the way the majority would expect. I can say we don't get many requests from big boards, enterprise or even that many individual hobbyists that want the ability to isolate content between friends and outside the benefit of the community at large. To the contrary, many ask for  less  user control. If market demand changes and there's genuine interest, of course we'll consider anything. There's certainly no incentive to not creating what your customers want, but we also have an obligation to the big picture. 
  9. Lindy added a post in a topic: Followers Are Superior To Friends   

    As the admin, you have full control over your member's permissions. If you want user-level control to allow end-users to recreate a mini-Facebook within a community suite via "friends" - that's not currently possible. If there's compelling feedback, we'll certainly revisit options -- but it's a niche request at present. Most do seem to consider a community... a community, with the admin creating division as necessary (such as we have sections for contributors.) 
    You should recognize that just because not ALL admins run their communities the same way does not mean we can, or should, accommodate all the various ways people could run their community. I'm sorry you feel we should expend the development effort to create features and functionality that, in reality, only a relative handful may use. What one considers critical to their community is a waste of resources to another. 
    That is, however, the purpose of feedback. You have some that prefer followers. A few that prefer friends. Another suggestion to create a bond between mutual followers. If there's overwhelming feedback that leads us to believe a good amount of users want to have a community in which users can essentially create their own private social network within your suite, we can certainly explore that further -- it would be foolish to ignore demand and opportunities. Conversely, we don't do things just because or based on a few rants and raves. Believe it or not, we do have a pretty good idea how our customers from all walks of life  generally  use our software (recognizing that not all sites are equal.) We don't always get everything perfect and we do prefer to start with a base that we can build upon and fine tune based on feedback, but we develop for the masses and rely on the third party marketplace for niche features. 
  10. Lindy added a post in a topic: What happened with Gallery?   

    You shouldn't see those broken images now.
  11. Lindy added a post in a topic: European Union cookie law. Yes another topic!   

    It was merely an attempt at some light hearted humo(u)r - no disrespect was intended.
    The fact that this topic started in 2013, the law has already changed several times since inception and you folks, even amongst yourselves still can't completely agree on how or even if you need to comply is telling in itself, is it not? China has pretty strict regulations. Even the US has varying regulations in different jurisdictions. We develop software... we're not global attorneys that keep track of and interpret laws across the world while incorporating all of those accommodations into the software -- hoping, for liability purposes, that we get it right for everyone. 
    IPS software is fully customizable -- you are absolutely free to customize it to suit your interpretation of the laws of your jurisdiction. Perhaps someone will create a marketplace add-on based on one of the many interpretations. Some think a mere disclaimer at the bottom "this site uses cookies" is sufficient. Others argue that implied consent is required. Some argue implied consent is only required for tracking cookies. Others argue not only do you need to obtain implied consent, you need to detail what every cookie does. In reality, what YOU are doing with your site and WHERE you are doing it determines what you need to do to comply, if anything. If, for example, you're adding analytics to your site, the requirements may be different than a stock IPS software installation. Whatever the case, interpretation of such end-user laws is unfortunately outside the responsibility of a software manufacturer -- I'm not aware of related software companies that provide for this, even those based within the EU. 
    We're very happy to entertain feedback regarding things like "I need XYZ feature to properly collect tax via Commerce." -- but we're not opening this particular pandoras box, sorry.
    I apologize that making light of the concern was perceived as offensive. I hope this statement better clarifies our position on EU regulation. If you have any further concerns - we're always here to listen. You may find me personally on my clydesdale wearing a red, white and blue lapel pin. (Final attempt at humor, I promise. :))
  12. Lindy added a post in a topic: European Union cookie law. Yes another topic!   

    I'm not aware of a significant loss of sales due to the fact we don't bear the site owner's burden of responsibility for ensuring compliance with laws of all varying jurisdictions. Whether we'd gain enough EU marketshare to justify the immense ongoing expenditure of retaining counsel in the EU for ongoing consulting with compliance and the extra development effort, is impossible to substantiate. At this juncture, we maintain that it's the responsibility of the site owner to comply with local laws. If you have feedback regarding features that aren't specific to compliance, but could make your life easier, please feel free to let us know. 
  13. Lindy added a post in a topic: Followers/Friends can be one system?   

    ​I'm not a fast runner by any stretch, but fortunately I can outrun a mopar!  
  14. Lindy added a post in a topic: European Union cookie law. Yes another topic!   

    Based on customer feedback, all customers residing in the EU will now pay $250 per license and $75 per renewal. There will then be a yes/no popup for cookies. 
    See? We listen!! 

  15. Lindy added a post in a topic: Followers/Friends can be one system?   

    Personally, I don't mind the idea and wouldn't think it would be woefully difficult in the overall scheme of things. I've brought this to our internal discussion tracker for the follower feature. 
    I'd be tempted to call mutual followers "Super Followers" vs "friends" just to annoy @Woodsman .  (I kid, I kid.) 


  1. IPS News

    • 507
    • 13983
    • 4832287