The options are there, though. A "Super Moderator" has always been site wide, regardless of the software package used. If you want to limit what your moderators do, you should make them a forum moderator and adjust their permissions accordingly.
For tech support issues, especially those that are being driven by a regional issue, this type of feature would be a godsend. I don't know how many times I've seen a thread resurrected when the original issue was solved ages ago.
What research? I wasn't asked and I didn't see anything in the forums asking feedback.
We DO use this feature, and arbitrarily removing it does a HUGE disservice to those that did. Make it an option. And this mindset of "just modify your site" is getting old. I've been there, done that. Have the t-shirt, bumper sticker and baseball cap. I will not spend hour after hour redoing things after an upgrade any more. And if "just modify your site" is going to be the response after arbitrarily removing something that affects a lot of users, you can be rest assured we'll start looking elsewhere.
I've often wished for this feature so members who are at work and get an email notification can respond via email as well, especially for those in environments where the business has blocked forum access.
What do I think of it? I think it stinks. Features that I use were arbitrarily removed, the skin design stinks to high heaven, and I shouldn't have to heavily modify something "out of the box" when it's installed.
Unless certain features are put back in, skiing will be a favorite pastime in Hades before 3.2 appears on my site.
I have to agree with this. The common consensus seems to be if something was removed that you want, get a modification to get it back. That isn't the point. I don't want to spend hours upon hours redoing my site whenever I do an upgrade. I did that with the early versions of vBulletin and it got old in a hurry.
Removing features that are redundant is a good thing. Arbitrarily removing features that many of us use is not a good thing. It's extremely unlikely I will upgrade to 3.2. And if further releases continue down this avenue, I'll be forced yet again to explore my options for a different software solution for my site.
I don't know what the decision process was for 3.2, but from a customer standpoint, it wasn't much of a process if we, the customers, weren't asked about what we use and what we don't use.
I'm on the fence with this one. While I can see where it would be something that many could use, I think I'd like it to be optional as to whether it's shown or not. Just because it's shared across hundreds of accounts doesn't necessarily make the item newsworthy nor does it lend credence to the validity of the subject.
Not to mention. I'm starting to get pretty sick of seeing +1 all over the place. Reminds me of previous fads that got old in a hurry.
Why not? If a new customer can't decide on their own whether the software is good for them or not, hiding the "bad" posts won't make it any more popular. Some companies already do this on their website and as a result, it will be a cold day in hell before I use their products or recommend them to someone else.
If your product is so weak that you have to delete/lock the posts that criticize it, your product most likely wasn't that good to begin with.
And there lies the rub. Small adjustment? It has taken a YEAR for my users to get fairly comfortable with the change from vBulletin to IPB. These are not "small" changes, nor would I expect these kind of changes in a minor revision release.
And before Charles jumps in about "not getting hung up on version numbers", I'd suggest looking at virtually every other software company out there and what is usually considered minor version releases vs major releases and the changes that occur with them. This was not a minor update. This was a major revision I would expect from a major upgrade (ie, 3.x to 4.x).
You want specifics? I'll give you specifics. The default skin is STILL geared towards "younger eyes". It's difficult to find things, and one shouldn't have to rely on something to "magically appear" in order to perform a function. What did you guys do? Go look at Xenforo, go "ooooooooooh SHINY!" and copy some stuff? If we had been that impressed with the stuff Kier was doing, we'd have gone with that package.
Bah. You do what you need to do. However, if the software continues on in the current direction that it's taking, I suspect I won't be the only one looking for a different solution.