Ocean West Posted March 9, 2016 Posted March 9, 2016 it would be nice to have a some preface to the changes implemented.
Morrigan Posted March 9, 2016 Posted March 9, 2016 https://community.invisionpower.com/release-notes/
Adriano Faria Posted March 9, 2016 Posted March 9, 2016 2 minutes ago, Morrigan said: https://community.invisionpower.com/release-notes/ I think he means the new forums structure. Some were meoved to another categories, others had permissions altered, etc.
Management Lindy Posted March 9, 2016 Management Posted March 9, 2016 I'm not sure how I could articulate the changes any better than simply looking at the community index. If you're referring to why the changes were made... to simplify and reduce redundancy.
chilihead Posted March 9, 2016 Posted March 9, 2016 It would be nice to see the tag definitions from your post in the Forum Rules of Feedback. I even had someone PM me to ask if I knew what each tag meant. I don't know why they asked me. It's not like I use that section much.
Rikki Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 On 3/9/2016 at 0:28 AM, Ocean West said: it would be nice to have a some preface to the changes implemented. I think we'll be posting something in the next couple of days, once issues are ironed out and the dust has settled. We aren't done making changes yet
bigPaws Posted March 16, 2016 Posted March 16, 2016 On 3/9/2016 at 5:28 AM, Ocean West said: it would be nice to have a some preface to the changes implemented. He's talking about giving users a preview/warning of what's coming - rather than just dumping it on them. Also, IMO (and expressed elsewhere) it wouldn't be a bad idea to include some clients in testing prior to major changes being pushed out - there can be downsides to only running ideas past people on the payroll or those closely linked to the company.
Morgin Posted March 18, 2016 Posted March 18, 2016 On 3/16/2016 at 6:28 PM, bigPaws said: He's talking about giving users a preview/warning of what's coming - rather than just dumping it on them. Also, IMO (and expressed elsewhere) it wouldn't be a bad idea to include some clients in testing prior to major changes being pushed out - there can be downsides to only running ideas past people on the payroll or those closely linked to the company. Why? it's their corporate site. This doesn't really impact the software. They can organize their company site how they see fit - we're probably the worst people to test since we are used to the quirks of old layouts and resistant to change and most the changes seem to be to make all of this more visible for those who are less of power users.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.