Dave58

Jυra, on 16 March 2012 - 10:32 AM, said:

So basically display the name picture and status. But the about me and online status and profile fields would have a "You must be this user's friend to view this content" message.

I support better privacy options. I personally wouldn't use it but I acknowledge the large user base that would. Additionally IPB may be the only forum software to not have this...retail anyway. I know on xenforo you can block it so only people you follow can see it or something. Then again xenforo has amazing stalking capabilities so the privacy is necessary.

Edit: IPS has already enabled checks so that banned members profile information can be blocked and I think they can also be blocked for guests. A few tweaks and additions should make this quite simple IMO. But I don't know much.

I believe the polls should be generally upgraded but for starters what I need is to be able to close a poll (not being able to vote) without closing the topic.

I agree with Callie, this is one of the rare weak points in IPB.

Instead of bells and whistles on the posting/topic view pages, more flexibility in configuration of the member's account would be appreciated.

I would like to have the option of setting to "Friends Only"

Jυra, on 13 March 2012 - 07:55 PM, said:

I have no clue what you are talking about. Please elaborate...
It has nothing to do with what you see in threads. Those would be the same as they are whether you have profiles visible to guests or not as in the default system now. We are talking about member profiles, not the little bit of info you see in threads.

Jυra, on 13 March 2012 - 07:55 PM, said:

Your argument is lacking, sorry. Whether members share personal information or not is irrelevant. As it is now, whether profiles are visible to just members only or members and guests, does not prevent or discourage members from sharing whatever information they want to share. If we actually care a bit about our end users and give them those extra privacy permissions, they can set it up so only their friends can see whatever it is they want to share on their profiles. It's actually irresponsible NOT to give members that extra privacy permission to decide who can look at their profile! You'd rather the admin decides an all or nothing. Some of us would like the members to decide for themselves...it is their profile after all...and if we can't be responsible enough to give them these privacy permissions, they can get that on VB forums or facebook etc. instead.

I would like to revisit this suggestion for some more feedback as it's important for our current project before we go live. Some of our partners have addressed some concerns about lacking profile privacy permissions. It's actually one reason we resorted to VB for another project we have. Most reasons had to do with profiles, sadly.

Does anyone have any idea on how to hack some friend only privacy permissions into the profiles? It would be greatly appreciated. If there is a mod (reasonably priced or free), please point me in that direction. Thank you.

I understand that the devs feel some features may be outdated and/or under-utilized, and that their removal is prudent for an overall benefit to the software.  However, I think the way those features are removed could be improved in order to minimize blowback with the customer base.

Please consider making official add-ons for features and functionality that is removed in the future.  This will allow IPS to get a more accurate assessment of just how much the feature is wanted by the customers, and also provide to customers a clear indication if their favored toy is just not that much of a draw.

Then, if the numbers call for it, decide whether to drop it, maintain it as an official add-on, or integrate it back into the script.  

Win/Win, IPS would have cold hard numbers backing up their decisions, and customers would be happy because there would be more transparency in the process and be able to give their members more of a heads up if something that was important to their community was being phased out, or if they'd need to develop their own solution in the future.

I'd also like to see a "friends' only" setting.

Jυra, on 07 January 2011 - 07:31 PM, said:

What is important or personal varies from site to site.

We also have members that would appreciate such functionality.

Jυra, on 16 August 2011 - 11:16 PM, said:

Clearly you haven't discovered Custom Profile Fields.  It's not a modification at all.  

And I wasn't even talking about changes in the board software for that matter.  I was simply saying not everybody wants their contact info flapping in the breeze.

Why should members be limited in what to share because IPB does not have privacy options? Give them the freedom to share personal information if they choose to do so, but with the freedom to block everyone but their friends from seeing it.

We should all take privacy seriously, but not so serious that we tell people not to share private info and don't offer them any privacy options to use! The all or nothing attitude is just another reason to use places like Facebook and VB forums instead. At least they offer some privacy options for members to make their own choices instead of being forced to deal with whatever the admin decides for them.

Here is a screenshot of some of VB's privacy options:

There needs to be a way to automatically notify a member that his PM box is full.

Currently, if a members PM box is full and someone tries to send that member a message, it tells the sender that the person can't receive PMs. However, the person with the full box is never notified.

It's painful to see dozens of forum posts every day asking members to clean out their PM box so somebody can send them a PM.

Please implement a "Messenger Full" notification on the next IP.Board.

Thanks.

Μark, on 23 July 2009 - 03:29 PM, said:

Because if for whatever reason we decide to not renew support + services (suppose such thing would exist) then we also give up our updates for life (perpetual) that were available when we bought the perpetual license that was available at the time.

Our license has an added value. There is no denying that and we are not trying to, of course we don't want to give it up, heck no. It was there, made available by IPS... But I don't think we should be "punished" because our license had that added value. I wasn't going to comment any more and wait for the official response on the matter, like I said before, but in my opinion Mark's post should be answered.

Μark, on 23 July 2009 - 03:29 PM, said:

I can stop paying for the service and still have lifetime support, upgrades, and access to the resource site (a "service" btw).