I was very surprised too, and disappointed to say the least. I thought it was intentional, but then it didn't make any sense. Why would the developers want to shut out members from being able to check which reports were filed/fixed/confirmed/etc, since it is the members who report the bugs in the first place.
I totally agree with kenichi. Trying to give more control to members would simply turn them into mini or closer to full-fledged moderators, which doesn't make sense, as the line between actual moderators and members would then be completely blurred. Sometimes, you have to learn to say "no" to members, as they are famously known to complain all the time. I've been webmaster and admin for almost a decade, and i can't even begin to testify about the thousands of cases where a member would show up and "demand" a certain feature, even escalating his request by gathering support and in some extreme cases, threatening to leave the forums. I went out of my way to make the missing features happen, and after paying good money to some third-party developers, the requested features were finally added. The rioting members calmed down, but lo and behold, these same members gradually left the forum or became so quiet, they never posted!! So, what's the use of always listening to what a minority wants when you can never be sure that all the efforts and money spent will be worth it in the long run. Anyway, with experience, most admins tend to get better at knowing when and how to deal with members and their unending lists of requests and dream features.
That's exactly what i asked about when i first installed IPB. The "0 warning points" is quite frankly completely unnecessary. It's like wearing a white shirt with big black writing "I have not yet committed any crimes". You could have just been wearing normal clothes unlike convicted criminals with the orange suits, if you get my meaning? Unless a member is convicted of violating the forum rules, there should be no such display of "0 warning points".
The only reason i can think of, why IPS made the warning system as it is, could be to reduce serve resource usage. Maybe using a simpler, more compact warning system lightens the load?? But it's still a step backward in terms of functionality and user-friendliness IMO.
What if you didn't allow members to post replies but edit only, using a new permission set? Unless you want to limit that to one or some topics only (instead of an entire board), then maybe there is a way to have custom permissions per topic... a modification maybe? You should check the marketplace in case it already exists.
Well, isn't the whole purpose of having a locked thread to limit the ability of members to edit/add/remove any replies. :rofl:
In your case, if the member has posted info that might be considered as "sensible", they should report the post and add the reason as "remove these words or line, etc" so the moderators or admins can take care of the editing.