profile privacy in IPB 4

[wingman23]

lets throw something into the arena here.. software developers and their ideas and the source of those ideas for improving each version, now looking at the updates for 4, ips are very clever very good at going at the nitty gritty coding for this and coding for that.. all the power to them, but shouldn't the ideas come from feedback from its users too, the people who are out there in the field using it, listening to their members and what they would like too.

This is why this is called the feedback section and i see more for this profile privacy than against it, and some smart cookie will see the need for it so make a hook and probably make a fortune.

Now this isn't free software is it, we pay enough i feel already without having to go to hooks for essential and some would say "basic" workings of a software like this, so feedback from its paying clients should be important, important enough to maybe listen a bit and not just go

"We have no plans for this"

Considering the magic IPS pulls off, surely this isn't all that hard to implement. Is it? :cool:

[Makoto]

Like why are you guys still going at this when ips has said it's not going to happen

They said it's not going to happen in 4.0, not it's not going to happen ever. This topic can be used to show a clear market demand for this feature, so IPS knows to take the suggestion more seriously for 4.1

That's just how it works.

[Rimi]

They said it's not going to happen in 4.0, not it's not going to happen ever. This topic can be used to show a clear market demand for this feature, so IPS knows to take the suggestion more seriously for 4.1

That's just how it works.

But this suggestion has been around since 3.2.

[Soniceffect]

But this suggestion has been around since 3.2.

As have many many others to be fair. Not everythings gonna get in 4.0 realistically. besides, I have every faith in your 3rd party solution ;)

[ZakRhyno]

But if you can just friend someone with out them approving its really a silly feature without saying or changing to "Watch" user.

[Rimi]

As have many many others to be fair. Not everythings gonna get in 4.0 realistically. besides, I have every faith in your 3rd party solution ;)

Thanks. ;D

[Dylan Riggs]

Maybe enough griping and complaining and moaning and please's will get them to add it...

[Rimi]

But if you can just friend someone with out them approving its really a silly feature without saying or changing to "Watch" user.

Didn't I already say that you can adjust your settings so that you have to approve friends first?

[Makoto]

Maybe enough griping and complaining and moaning and please's will get them to add it...

I prefer providing constructive feedback, opinions and suggestions on how to really implement such a functionality and explaining how and why I think it would be beneficial for my community to have this over moaning and griping like a little kid, and I think that's more likely to get a suggestion added.

Complaining that people are suggesting a change or improvement to a piece of commercial software they pay for, however, is surely ridiculous.

I don't see many people here saying "I demand this be added in 4.0! I will NOT wait any longer!", I see people posting constructive feedback and agreeing with a suggestion, and there's surely nothing wrong with that.

[Rimi]

The most annoying thing about xenforo forums is how you'll go into someone's profile so you can look through of of their old posts and you won't be able to because their profile is friends only. Screw that. C:

[Dylan Riggs]

I prefer providing constructive feedback, opinions and suggestions on how to really implement such a functionality and explaining how and why I think it would be beneficial for my community to have this over moaning and griping like a little kid, and I think that's more likely to get a suggestion added.

Complaining that people are suggesting a change or improvement to a piece of commercial software they pay for, however, is surely ridiculous.

I don't see many people here saying "I demand this be added in 4.0! I will NOT wait any longer!", I see people posting constructive feedback and agreeing with a suggestion, and there's surely nothing wrong with that.

You're not getting it Kirito - That's all we've really been really doing about profile privacy, and it's not working. We must result to more extreme measures! :rofl:

[Makoto]

You're not getting it Kirito - That's all we've really been really doing about profile privacy, and it's not working. We must result to more extreme measures! :rofl:

Should I gather the picket signs, or will you?

[Dylan Riggs]

You can grab it - They wouldn't be expecting it from you lol

[Makoto]

You can grab it - They wouldn't be expecting it from you lol

You must not stalk me enough, Lindy in particular hates my guts.

I'd probably be shot on sight.

No thanks.

[fadedturbulence]

But this suggestion has been around since 3.2.

Hmm then it may be proof right there that this is not some 'on-the-whim-crazy-idea/fad'...maybe?

When was 3.2 released? Like 2011? 2012? I am honestly not sure, I would guestimate around then. That's an estimation of like 2 years asking for this particular granularity. Like GreenLinks stated, kind of disappointing they didn't listen to the suggestion from back then too.

I think I remember some of the conversation back then as well and they were saying similar answers, that profiles should be 'open'.

I agree fully with everyones stories/suggestions too, +1 from me. I think options can only make a product stronger. Every community is NOT the same. Like others have said, there are communities of all types, why NOT allow the ADMIN to choose WHICH fields can have those 'friends-only' feature. Give the option to the admin, its obviously up to this staff member (or owner) to ultimately decide if something sensitive should allow the member to 'friend-only' it. No need to go all out and just make every member be able to choose any field be friend only or not, that's overkill and could cripple the community like Rimi stated above about xenforo, like if you allow the member to 'friend-only' say religion and your site is all about religion, that is definitely not going to be a good idea. But if you have the field for religion on something like a gamer community, that may be something you want to 'LET' the members choose, as if its blocked it will NOT mess up the flow of the site.

Options options options! Every single community, person and idea is different. Like someone else said, one-size does not fit all in a 'Community' software, that is not cheap none the less. PLEASE IPS, realize that some may not care about privacy, but some do. Especially with times like now where everyone IS so personal online with their stuff it seems and also like that story about the man that stalked the women and proceeded to do worse things (ugh thats sick. A very good example why something like this should be allowed in the communities, allow your members to block some of the more personal data that they don't mind sharing with their FRIENDS, not some random perv). With options and granularity, you can make more happy and less unhappy. Who loses out with options of a 'turn this feature on? turn this feature off?' I can't really think of anyone..really options can help differentiate communities too, not all the same plain janes

My 2 cents anyway

[Jυra]

For those that want all this privacy and profile stuff, why choose forum software over social network software? There are plenty of examples of topic based social networks.

[Makoto]

For those that want all this privacy and profile stuff, why choose forum software over social network software? There are plenty of examples of topic based social networks.

Because most all social network software is terrible, and because IPS software does everything I need, and it does it better than any of the competition can.

I've used a world of others scripts before IP.Board.

[Rimi]

Because most all social network software is terrible, and because IPS software does everything I need, and it does it better than any of the competition can.

So then....what you're saying is...you don't need profile privacy since

IPS software does everything I need

[Makoto]

So then....what you're saying is...you don't need profile privacy since

Har har.

I mostly meant in the broader sense of also offering a dedicated file management and gallery system.

[Jim McClain]

For those that want all this privacy and profile stuff, why choose forum software over social network software? There are plenty of examples of topic based social networks.

Because those who would join a support forum might not be as apt to join a social network for the same kind of support. I use another forum software and some major plugins and add-ons to make it a complete site and have been pretty happy with it up to now. But it's old and I don't like the upgrade path and it doesn't offer the modernization and features I believe my members would like going forward. IPS3.x is in that same category, but IPS4 is a whole new game. It has great potential. I may convert to it regardless of the lack of profile privacy, but I would be a LOT happier if it had more profile privacy and other options.

Now, show us this social network software that will beat any of the top ranked forum software as a community/support based platform. I belong to a number of webmaster related websites and haven't heard much mention of any. Facebook, LinkedIn? Please.

[GreenLinks]

For those that want all this privacy and profile stuff, why choose forum software over social network software? There are plenty of examples of topic based social networks.

I am running one of the biggest boards out there and profile privacy is a key feature on our board. So why don't you simply use an alternative board solution.

Before responding just stop 3 minutes and re think your message. Was one of the worst messages in all thread.

[wingman23]

For those that want all this privacy and profile stuff, why choose forum software over social network software? There are plenty of examples of topic based social networks.

lol there speaks somebody with not much experience of social network sites,, ive been at this a long time, tried them all from ning to dolphin and on the whole they are (being polite) "rubbish and look like amateur hour" i honestly believe this is the best community software there is, its just that it needs a few basic addition, perhaps things that IPS dont feel the need for on this site, like profile privacy, so it might not occur to them that its needed in some communities.

I find specially with the profile customizations that members do feel that part of the site is their own little space that they can put as much information about themselves that they want to.

The profiles dont get utilized like they should because of the lack of control that members feel they have over their little page. If you are going to give them all an individual space they can put what they want about themselves, then why not give them a key to their own front door, it feels logical to me.

:thumbsup:

[Jυra]

I am running one of the biggest boards out there and profile privacy is a key feature on our board.

Niche use is niche. Pointing out board size is arrogance.

Wanting a social network and feeling stuck on forum software with add-ons must feel awful. Still isn't won't be a social network you're looking for.

[Matt]

The most annoying thing about xenforo forums is how you'll go into someone's profile so you can look through of of their old posts and you won't be able to because their profile is friends only. Screw that. C:

The crazy thing is that you can just go to the search engine and enter their name as the author and retrieve those posts almost as quickly. So why go to the bother of "hiding" them from your profile?

If this is a discussion on profile customisation, then that's one thing. But wrapping this discussion up with a "privacy" angle is misleading because all the information you make "private" on your profile is plainly visible elsewhere (search engine, topics themselves, post bit, etc). With the exception of a few things like the post count and join date, the rest of the information you supply to your profile is voluntary. You already have complete control what to share with other forum members by excluding the data in the first place.

[Makoto]

If this is a discussion on profile customisation, then that's one thing.

I was assuming one of the main angles here was profile information. Your about me information and your contact information, for example, as well as other custom profile fields. Then there's also status updates.

An admin may wish to make profiles publicly accessible to guests, but members may want to keep their contact information or status updates hidden from members that aren't registered/friended.

Though my suggestion wasn't entirely related to profile "privacy," I do also think it would be nice to have the option to only allow personal messages from friends.