rbiss Posted August 24, 2008 Share Posted August 24, 2008 I don't know if this is in the works but if it isn't it would be great if it could be integrated. I would like to be able to change a couple of forums so that signatures don't appear. I would like to control that from the admin side and not have to edit out signatures or rely on members to remember to disable the signature when posting. If the ability to do that can be integrated into 3.0 it will be appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DaRk MaN Posted August 24, 2008 Share Posted August 24, 2008 Not only permissions by forums, I need as well signature and avatar permissions per user group. My forum is growing and growing and I need to create premium members with subscription. Premium members must have more privileges than free users. I think this mod is not difficult to implemet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Matt. Posted August 24, 2008 Share Posted August 24, 2008 -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DaRk MaN Posted August 24, 2008 Share Posted August 24, 2008 -1 -1, why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrixieTang Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 -1, why? More permissions means more problems, more to worry about, etc. I really agree here, it shouldn't be default, however I'm curious now as to the IPB 3 permission system and whether it could address this... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henke37 Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 +1, Just plain makes sense. It's not a hard db query to do anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DaRk MaN Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 More permissions means more problems, more to worry about, etc. I really agree here, it shouldn't be default, however I'm curious now as to the IPB 3 permission system and whether it could address this... 2 settings more means more problems? I think you are exagerating a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jυra Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 What is this used for? By that I mean why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrixieTang Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 2 settings more means more problems? I think you are exagerating a lot. If they add this, everyone will start pushing for permissions they want you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DaRk MaN Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Not only permissions by forums, I need as well signature and avatar permissions per user group. My forum is growing and growing and [b]I need to create premium members with subscription[/b]. Premium members must have more privileges than free users. I think this mod is not difficult to implemet.If they add this, everyone will start pushing for permissions they want you know. For this reason I need to create subscriptions, with payment of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrixieTang Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 For this reason I need to create subscriptions, with payment of course. I meant everyone would start pushing IPS for permissions, not you. If they caved into this one, then more and more the software would become a bloated mess. They'll add what they add, and as Josh confirmed, it will be possible to add new permissions with IPB 3's permission system, so you could always ask for a mod. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mert Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 I can't see any need of this. Even adding it wouldn't be a problem for IPS -like many of other suggestions-, it's better to stay away from extreme details. It won't add any value to the software and adding more unnecessary controls, more unnecessary queries would make IPB a piece of junk. You said adding an extra query wouldn't hurt so here you go: Think that you've 15 posts on one page of topic (which is the standard) it means 15 queries more to parse the page. Let's say this topic has 3 pages (45 queries) and 3 people is viewing it at the same time. Each user reads a page in a minute so you'll have 135 more queries just in 3 minutes on only 1 topic. (without caching or join queries) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
U2 Fan Posted August 26, 2008 Share Posted August 26, 2008 Not only permissions by forums, I need as well signature and avatar permissions per user group. My forum is growing and growing and I need to create premium members with subscription. Premium members must have more privileges than free users. I totally agree! This is exactly the type of thing that I requested a year ago in this thread about User-Group Permissions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jυra Posted August 26, 2008 Share Posted August 26, 2008 Again. Why is this feature needed or wanted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
U2 Fan Posted August 26, 2008 Share Posted August 26, 2008 Again. Why is this feature needed or wanted? What a stupid question. Take a look at my post above and you'll see plenty of reasons! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
^^MeX^^ Posted August 26, 2008 Share Posted August 26, 2008 Um, just saying here, we want IPB to not be like VB, lol... I think it was decided with the 50 thousand topics on it, :P Features like these will be more problems, more coding, more patches, more more more, if you need it, get a mod. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottydawg Posted August 26, 2008 Share Posted August 26, 2008 Something like this really belongs as a mod. It just adds to wasted queries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrixieTang Posted August 26, 2008 Share Posted August 26, 2008 What a stupid question. Take a look at my post above and you'll see plenty of reasons! It's not "needed", and it should be a mod, not a standard feature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
U2 Fan Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 It's not "needed", and it should be a mod, not a standard feature. If anything's not "needed" and should be added with a mod it's the signatures themselves! What are they good for?! Signatures are, in general, a visual diarrhoea that pollutes many online forums. For example, who wants to read through all that gibberish you've got in your sig (again and again, every single time you post)? I mean... seriously. Unfortunately, in IP.Board, there's currently no effective way for admins to control the use of signatures (i.e., which groups can use them and whether they can add links and signature graphics, etc.). Since signatures are a standard feature, it would be nice if admins could have some form of permission-based control over them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrixieTang Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 If anything's not "needed" and should be added with a mod it's the signatures themselves! What are they good for?! Signatures are, in general, a visual diarrhoea that pollutes many online forums. For example, who wants to read through all that gibberish you've got in [i]your[/i] sig (again and again, every single time you post)? I mean... seriously. Unfortunately, in IP.Board, there's currently no effective way for admins to control the use of signatures (i.e., which groups can use them and whether they can add links and signature graphics, etc.). Since signatures are a standard feature, it would be nice if admins could have some form of permission-based control over them! Just to let you know, you have a signature too. :rolleyes: Also, "Maximum length (in bytes) for user signatures", set that to 0 and you can't add a signature I believe, since you seem to hate them so much. <_< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
U2 Fan Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Just to let you know, you have a signature too. :rolleyes: I am aware of that. But my signature is just one simple URL. It's not packed with multiple links, useless random quotes, annoying banner graphics, or any other repetitive mess that is so prevalent in signature files these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 This is something that can be accomplished very easily with the addition of one single setting to select which forums to suppress signatures in, and one change to the Topic View -> RenderRow template to check that setting. It hardly even constitutes making a mod out of it. EDIT: Made this tutorial to show you how to achieve this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCWT Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Thanks for that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DaRk MaN Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Thank you Michael. I still don't understand why you don't want to include this setting. It's a common setting in other forums, like Big Boards or PHPBB. In Big Boards forum, moreover, if a user writes two or more posts, it only shows signature in the first one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Who said they didn't want to include this setting? Just because a setting exists in one brand of forum software, does that mean all others need it too? What would make IPB IPB then if it just copies settings and features of other types of forums? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.