Content Deletion - needs to be configurable

[Logan]

With v4, when editing a user group there is a setting "Can delete own content?" which allows them to globally delete anything and everything of their's on the forum. It's no longer possible to configure what they can specifically delete, ie: posts vs topics, gallery albums/images, etc.

In the particular case with our forum, we want users to simply be able to manage their own galleries. Regularly images are uploaded by accident, duplicate uploads, etc. users need to contact a moderator in order to have their images deleted. Because we don't want to allow them to delete their forum topics/posts.

Is there any way you allow us to define what users can delete again? It would be nice to delete posts vs topics, but at the very minimum users should be able to delete their own gallery content without being allowed to delete topics/posts. Content deletion/management options per application would be really nice. This seems like an oversight.

Too many problems can arise if members can delete topics/posts, especially if they are angry/planning to leave the forum. They could end up deleting big productive topics from the forum.

Thanks!

[Morrigan]

I would recommend instead of giving them the option to "Delete their own content" that you only give them the option to "Hide it" it will give them the ability to make it "disappear" to other users but does not remove it entirely. Then a staff member can review and delete it as needed.

[Logan]

33 minutes ago, Morrigan said:

I would recommend instead of giving them the option to "Delete their own content" that you only give them the option to "Hide it" it will give them the ability to make it "disappear" to other users but does not remove it entirely. Then a staff member can review and delete it as needed.

Hiding would still keep the image on the server which would take up disk space which is already limited on our site.

Our site gets hundreds of image uploads per day, so it's not really feasible for staff to review all the "hidden" images to delete them. I really want users to be able to delete their own images as needed without being able to delete other content  

[Hitori Bocchi]

9 hours ago, Morrigan said:

I would recommend instead of giving them the option to "Delete their own content" that you only give them the option to "Hide it" it will give them the ability to make it "disappear" to other users but does not remove it entirely. Then a staff member can review and delete it as needed.

I doubt that somewhere in europe it is possible to have a facebook policy towards pictures like in the us. You want the admin to delete them and he has to comply with it or pay a lot of cash... but its different here with posts, since they are not necessary protected by copyright law (only if you write a poem or something like that).

[Morrigan]

Which is fine @Hitori Bocchi but there are many ways to do this. Not allowing your members to delete content "outright" isn't to say you are denying deletion but confirming that it's what needs to be done.

I prefer that if someone wants their content deleted then they report it and their reason for it. Then I can fully remove it. What if they thought it was something they wanted to remove and then change their mind in ten minutes? It gives them the ability to say "whoops".

[chilihead]

Hide own content is global too. Why is this? Definitely don't want to allow members to delete or hide globally. Deleting an image or gallery is pretty standard, but we don't want to enable it on forums. It should be up to admins if they delete blog entries as well, and blog posts. And records of their own as well as record posts. There should be permissions for each. I don't mind if they delete their blogs, that's their prerogative. But not discussions.

Delete/Hide permissions needed per app and in app, content item or post, imo.

[chilihead]

Looks like Blogs does have a dedicated setting (delete only not hide): Can delete own blogs?
But no other app. Gallery really needs hide/delete.

And what about status updates? You can't even edit them so you have to offer delete, for mistakes.

[darmok1]

Feel very strongly about this also. Any comment from IPS on why this was done or if this will change?

I've reported this as a bug in tickets a few times and was brushed off. Makes NO sense that we can't configure specifically what members are allowed to delete, particularly their own gallery images.

[Joel R]

There are quite a few actions that would make more sense as a per-action permission of category instead of global membergroup options:

Bypass content moderation, hide own content, delete own content

[Hitori Bocchi]

9 hours ago, Morrigan said:

Which is fine @Hitori Bocchi but there are many ways to do this. Not allowing your members to delete content "outright" isn't to say you are denying deletion but confirming that it's what needs to be done.

I prefer that if someone wants their content deleted then they report it and their reason for it. Then I can fully remove it. What if they thought it was something they wanted to remove and then change their mind in ten minutes? It gives them the ability to say "whoops".

Make a box "Do you really want to delete this content. This can't be undone. YES/NO". But it should not be put into the hands of the admin, whether it will be deleted or not, atleast not the pictures in the gallery. And also a picture is something you most likely still got on your camera/computer etc. unlike a post.

[chilihead]

4 hours ago, Joel R said:

There are quite a few actions that would make more sense as a per-action permission of category instead of global membergroup options:

Bypass content moderation, hide own content, delete own content

Add tag settings (open/closed max/min) to that list. 

[darmok1]

At this point we are seriously considering converting forum software.

We MUST allow members to hide or delete their gallery images as it just causes too much work otherwise. Our galleries are used like storybooks for users to showcase their work. But now certain members end up hiding or deleting their own topics/posts which we do not want them to do (if a topic starts to get heated, etc) - this is something that our moderators must do and we prefer to make examples out of problem topics instead of members handling it themselves.

We really, really need users to delete or hide their own gallery images without it being applied globally to ALL their content.

[Admonstrator]

+1 for @darmok1

In my opinion it's pretty standard that a user can delete his/her own pictures but not topics or even entries within the board.

[chilihead]

8 minutes ago, Admonstrator said:

In my opinion it's pretty standard that a user can delete his/her own pictures but not topics or even entries within the board.

I'd say that's the highest priority, could definitely use a better matrix (which 3.4 had) but deleting images is pretty standard and needed.

[darmok1]

Any updates from IPS?

[AtariAge]

On 11/5/2015, 2:19:07, Logan said:

Too many problems can arise if members can delete topics/posts, especially if they are angry/planning to leave the forum. They could end up deleting big productive topics from the forum.

Thanks!

This is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT to me, and I'm glad you brought it up.  I do not allow members to delete their posts at all, as you're absolutely correct in that members who are angry and/or are planning on leaving the forum can wreak havoc amongst threads if they start mass deleting their posts.  I've had it happen before, and I've had to write scripts to restore topics and posts when this has occurred.  The same can happen with post editing--I've had members edit away literally thousands of posts, and again, I had to go to backups to restore them.  I now only allow members to edit posts for 60 minutes, and subscribers can edit posts for 30 days.  I even had to modify the forum software to allow me to give people the ability to indefinitely edit specific posts and threads.  Boy, I wish this was a standard feature, as I will have to modify 4.x with the same functionality, as it's very important on my forum. 

If there is only a global setting per user to allow them to delete ALL of their content, I will have to leave it disabled.  Which will be a huge pain in the ass, since people certainly want the ability to delete photos, blog posts, and other things that are not posts/topics. 

Please, Invision, consider adding some additional granularity in terms of what privileges users can be given in terms of deleting content. 

Thank you, 

 ..Al

[Hexsplosions]

I'm just about to move a forum over to IPS4.1 from IP.Board 3.4.8 with Gallery. This topic is a bit of a deal breaker. I certainly do not want users deleting their own forum content at their leisure, but I do want those same users to have control over their galleries.

This needs addressing. This is basic functionality I would expect with any software offering multiple content types.

[Joel R]

Permit me to go slightly off topic. One of the macro things that's always confused me about the overall organization of IPS is why certain permissions are global versus category.  This is a general observation.  

You have permissions in the category, in settings, and in member groups.  

They're located all over, they override each other, they allow certain actions but then you need to go to another location to set the same permission etc.

There really ought to be a more elegant approach to layering and toggling these permissions in a single centralized location.   

[chilihead]

1 minute ago, Joel R said:

Permit me to go slightly off topic. One of the macro things that's always confused me about the overall organization of IPS is why certain permissions are global versus category.  This is a general observation.  

You have permissions in the category, in settings, and in member groups.  

They're located all over, they override each other, they allow certain actions but then you need to go to another location to set the same permission etc.

There really ought to be a more elegant approach to layering and toggling these permissions in a single centralized location.   

Yes like the global setting here but then there is "Can delete own blogs?" Wondering how that even works, if yes but global is no, or if global is yes and this is no, can you remove them? Very confusing.

[Hexsplosions]

Global permissions are more confusing than granular ones.

All I need, as an admin, is:

• Can delete own topics?
• Can delete own posts?
• Can delete own status updates?
• Can delete own attachments?
• Can delete own gallery images?
• Can delete own gallery album?
• Can delete own blog entries?
• Can delete own blog?
• Can delete own database entries?

That is so clear and I only need to run through each of these permissions once per user group, but I will know exactly what each member group can and cannot delete.

Global permissions that cross over different content types absolutely perplex me. It makes no logical sense and I can't think of a single use case why a global permission is better than the more granular ones. I would have thought admin control over content removal is a critical element that should have been considered up front.

I really hope this gets sorted, and fast. I sing the praises of IPS every chance I get, often coming to their defence in threads, but this situation made even me do this:

[chilihead]

Yes content items and posts per app respectively.
+Own status updates and own replies.

Global has 0 control.

[Hexsplosions]

This has fallen to page 2 but I see other feedback getting immediate responses.

I consider this quite a critical issue.

Any feedback from IPS would be appreciated. Right now, members have to message a moderator to remove images that are rightfully, and lawfully, their property.

[Lindy]

I've logged it and will follow up. 

[Hexsplosions]

Thanks @Lindy. Much appreciated.

[chilihead]

Thanks Lindy.