Jump to content

Forum Rules.. Yikes IPB


Recommended Posts

I wonder if the forum rules will ever be right. Since I've had this software I've needed to use html in forum rules, Matt graciously one day fixed that in an earlier version and we could use the rules area with images and no bb code and no interference from universal editor settings. For example, let's try adding a simple linked picture to the forum rules and watch the nightmare unfold

1. When linking the image in rules section it will first pull up a new window of the image when the image is clicked, it then opens the correct link page in the original screen which is what it should do. It should not however create a new pop-up to show that image when linked.


Next,
By using the new editor it has taken much power from an admin by simply making him adhere to certain standards everyone else has to adhere by which was not the case before. Admins had the ability to flex what they needed in that field. What happens now...

1. You add an image and you're restricted to limitations like linked image size.. :o .... So unless you allow people posting images to show monster 2000 wide pixel images off one of their gallery sites you're borked for using any images in this field of the size needed.

Basically if you need to add images to the forum rules now your limited to the point you can not use any images at all. I used this area for my paid advertiser to put sales banners in and have all the way to now. I shouldn't have to compromise allowing huge linked images to allow this to happen. I also can't see IPB removing the devil editor in this area so I fear the worst but I have to make my plea here :D

Kind Regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I used this area for my paid advertiser to put sales banners in and have all the way to now.



Well there's your problem. You're using a feature of the software for something other than what it's intended for, and expecting it to still do what you want. The reason no one else ever has mentioned this problem until now is because I doubt anyone else puts pictures in their forum rules; forum rules are pretty much just text from what I've ever seen.

If you want people to be able to put sales banners in that spot, there's an advertising system built-in to the product. If that's not robust enough for you, then see about a third-party solution. But don't try to shoehorn your own system into something that it wasn't designed for, and then give this sort of melodramatic feedback to IPS when it doesn't work.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well there's your problem. You're using a feature of the software for something other than what it's intended for, and expecting it to still do what you want. The reason no one else ever has mentioned this problem until now is because I doubt anyone else puts pictures in their forum rules; forum rules are pretty much just text from what I've ever seen.



If you want people to be able to put sales banners in that spot, there's an advertising system built-in to the product. If that's not robust enough for you, then see about a third-party solution. But don't try to shoehorn your own system into something that it wasn't designed for, and then give this sort of melodramatic feedback to IPS when it doesn't work.



Lol Michael, It did work for that and at one point Matt even fixed it in a previous version and it's worked for 2 years. BTW - it is designed for images, it's in the editor.. DUH!

Now on top of that the editor allows you to link a image already, at what point does using a linked image require the image to open in a new window and open the link in a separate window? Seen millions of websites and that's not normal protocol. But you think it is?

If your using the editor in that location and the editor has image capability it should work proper, pretty simple when you look at it without being impaired by anger!

And btw I have no problems with paying for third party add-ons, I've spent hundreds with Marcher over the past couple of months! I understand wholly what add-ons are and this imo doesn't fall under that. Admins should have the ability to add what they need in an administrative area without regular editor restrictions. A simple text box would suffice that allowed straight html. As you put it, if all you need it for is text then.....

I went back and read my post and see no melodramatic crap but your post however ... LOL
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Now on top of that the editor allows you to link a image already, at what point does using a linked image require the image to open in a new window and open the link in a separate window? Seen millions of websites and that's not normal protocol. But you think it is?


I told you that I tried it myself and this does not happen.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrong Train paw :smile: I take a few of them myself at times :D They are however being re-directed now to the correct page by text using the editor because I wont sacrifice linked images being 2000 pixels wide at times in the forums and not being resized in posts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The page created in content is linked through that area now but the text link is not a nice designed graphic.
http://www.centersta...mmersuperstore/


You can also see how I used them here
http://www.centersta...roup-buy-store/


And video players here
http://www.centersta...forum/47-mapex/

So these areas do get used for other purposes

If all this area is meant for is text it should have a simple text box. Little overkill imo for what's needed. Again , just stating a suggestion here as the title of the forum is "feedback" .. Wow, hard to believe the feedback was this offensive but ok :D Hopefully others providing feedback don't get attacked like this, might hamper it in the future! And for future reference when a change is made that effects a advertiser that help pays for a dual quad-core server I will comment again! Some people actually have advertisers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one is attacking you buddy, your reading that part all wrong, can you explain a little more exactly what the problem is ? you seem to have a page working and linked up fine, are you saying you can not add an image to that page ? because the image settings are not wide enough ? just trying to understand why your having issues because adding a image there or any media should be very easy to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The images are there on the one page paw because it was not edited after upgrade, the page leading to the group buy store was edited and that's how I found out about the issue. So I wont edit those other pages with full images as to not lose them. Very simply Paw the link image restrictions determine what size the image displays in that area because you use the editor. If you take away those link image restrictions and set it to null/0 then I can again put a full image in that area, the issue comes in then when users link images in the forum the images will show in full width. I'm not willing to allow linked images to be shown at 2000 wide pixels on the forum so that area is now useless for adding images which the editor allows. The trade off is un-acceptable so I chose to keep restrictions on the forum images. There is no work-around on this paw and that's why I left my feedback. First time in 7 years of using forum software I've had this issue and it's hard to explain to someone helping pay your server bill why their advert leading into their group buy page was removed but I found a solution... Send the advertiser over to read this thread :smile: He understands what I'm up against now especially after reading Michaels post and has been a little more forgiving on the issue. On the downside doing that unfortunately changed his mind on a purchase and some add-on work..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK i see what your doing, you using the forum rules yes ? and loading a sponsors graphic into it and using that but for some reason it is now not working and throwing the link to the picture and not the picture ?

First I read this wrong and i read it as forum rules as in rules and terms / conditions which is why I mentioned use a content page, which was the wrong advice and the wrong train, but i see what your doing now as I do the same thing in forum rules per say or will be.

Having not updated to the latest version it would be hard for me to say whats happening but i load my images to gallery then add them from there and ad the hyper link with no problems.

re the size settings / new editor i suppose I am about to find out as I am about to upgrade (just waiting on one more hook update first before i can do that) but please keep things in the loop or when i get there i suppose i will have the same problems ? if not sorted.

most times more often than not there is a way to skin the cat so I am sure there will be a way to sort things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

update - ok just changed a banner and see what the op is talking about, major dodo ? I will raise a ticket but this is not right / what happened to the html ? it keep converting my code and is not ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Well there's your problem. You're using a feature of the software for something other than what it's intended for, and expecting it to still do what you want. The reason no one else ever has mentioned this problem until now is because I doubt anyone else puts pictures in their forum rules; forum rules are pretty much just text from what I've ever seen.



If you want people to be able to put sales banners in that spot, there's an advertising system built-in to the product. If that's not robust enough for you, then see about a third-party solution. But don't try to shoehorn your own system into something that it wasn't designed for, and then give this sort of melodramatic feedback to IPS when it doesn't work.




Well after discovering that I could no longer add script I was shovelled of here to this thread, while I read the words trying to shoehorn / I think many used this as a way to use an area to allow forum sponsorship or per forum advertising which is not available in any other "advertising system" as it does not exist.

So givien the limitations of any exiting options / non third party options to do this, we now are penalised with the removal of a system that hurt no one, nor hurt anything, yet for no reason other than to complicate what was not complicated it has been removed with a unworkable option and is about as handy as buying a bucket with holes.

You have to wonder why people fix things that are not broken, before it was a way that worked and allowed people to use it this way should they wish to do so, the whole premis of shoehorn is not justified if it were nobody would make a hook at at all, instead we would just use what we have.

So instead of a real asset we now have a system that does not work and is broken / does not work (now until the next upgrade) so you left with banners you can not change or broken banners you need to pull down because of the errors.

Lastly you now need to look at getting a hook or something made to put back the functionaboitity that was taken away for no real purpose reason or rhyme.

It seems on one hand I am amazed by the sheer brilliance and thinking behind IP and it's direction, then keep slapping my head on other things.

@ Michael / the response is in general to the frustrations of this decission not your post / reply.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey paw,
The vioce of reason you are Sir :)

Well after discovering that I could no longer add script I was shovelled of here to this thread, while I read the words trying to shoehorn / I think many used this as a way to use an area to allow forum sponsorship or per forum advertising which is not available in any other "advertising system" as it does not exist.



Any normal person with common sense would come to the conclusion you have paw(referring to shoehorned comment-not software). For as long as I can remember sites have used the rules areas/forum descriptions for a multitude of reasons. Not only that, Matt did fix this area to work with the old text area so there was nothing for sure trying to be "shoehorned", it was already available.

But hey, things change, I understand that too, It would just be nice to be able to use those areas again, they get no use for anything else for me. That being said "For me" may not fit the general as a whole in which I concede I have no ground to stand on. That's why I mentioned how it effected me personally which I believe is what the feedback section is for? ......!

Hopefully in the future maybe IPB will consider a reversal of sorts on this to make it more admin friendly in this particular area again. I wouldn't trade IPB for anything so the issue is pretty small when in comparison to the rest of the awesome product.

Thanks paw, other feedback at least gives IPB something to chew on.

Kind Regards
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@csm - let me be very clear - I love IP to bits, everywhere I go I preach IP, the people, the staff, the app, the support, everything about IP I love,

There is also nothing wrong with saying it as it is unless we live in a state of dictatorship, So as it stands nothing was broken and there are no obvious reasons as to why these changes were made.

A few more things to think about is first the bbcode editor, what a pig of a thing to use, it has to be the only bb editor of its type I have ever come across online, so used to flicking to editor mode and then ? o yuk get me out of here, what was that, but the logic of it is that to re implement what was taken away or the ability to add script, we now need to know how to build a bb code to add script back into the system.

Once we have done that you need to cut and dissect any script to get it back into the system, and it is very important that you set the b code to admin only ( to prevent bad script being added ) to add the script back to what ever was an admin only area anyway.

Same result with a now complicated method, that potentially opens up to more errors than before, I to hope it is just yep OK put back what was not broken we called that one wrong, if not a long way around for the same results and probably paying the first hook writer with a fix to put it back as it was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...