asdasdasdfsdfsdfsdf Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 First, I'd like to request that the default built-in ban system allows users to still view the site, but removes the ability to interact with the community at all. This includes restricting posts, status updates, status replies, PMs, signature/avatar/cover photo changes, etc. Basically, there should be an option for bans to allow members to still view IP.Pages and IP.Forums as well. Just because you have to ban somebody does not mean your site should be completely off-limits to them. As a workaround, I've resorted to creating a banned member group. While I lack the ability to set unban dates and to view only all members that are banned, it seems this is the easiest work-around. I only have one problem. I can limit almost everything I need, except the ability to prevent status update replies. This is inconvenient for me because the idea of banned users is allowing them to be able to view content but to not be able to partake in any community interaction. Banned users using member groups could retaliate and spam status update replies. I believe there should be a way to disable this in permissions, and if not then disabling the ability to post status updates should also prevent the replying of status updates. Many may not agree with me and believe a ban should prevent all access to a website, but I believe that preventing access to a website is not the solution. Users should be free to browse your website and should also be allowed to make support requests in regards to previous purchases, billing, ban-appeals, etc. I look to provide quality customer support, and it feels wrong locking someone completely out of the system especially if they're a prior customer and have a billing problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aiwa Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 Many valid points about tiered banning system. What I think you're looking for, though, is the warning system. You can set up different actions based on the number of warning points, including time based restrictions. Time based moderation requirement, time based posting restriction, and time based complete access removal. Does this help with the status updates, likely not. That's another issue entirely that is probably best left for its own feedback topic so it doesn't get lost in this one. Or submitted as a bug. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asdasdasdfsdfsdfsdf Posted July 1, 2016 Author Share Posted July 1, 2016 I plan to use the warning system as well, but from what I understand suspending from accessing the site via the warning system also prevents them from viewing pages/forums. Unfortunately, that's the biggest problem. Using membergroups I can achieve that, but once again I can't stop someone from spamming replies to status updates. =/ I'll create a bug report in regards to status update replies, as I don't imagine it's intended by design to be able to restrict everything except that. I'm still hoping the developers here at IPS would consider adding a setting for actual bans that allows them to passively view when logged in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aiwa Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 30 minutes ago, Douglas Reason said: I plan to use the warning system as well, but from what I understand suspending from accessing the site via the warning system also prevents them from viewing pages/forums. Unfortunately, that's the biggest problem. Using membergroups I can achieve that, but once again I can't stop someone from spamming replies to status updates. =/ It does, but there is also the option to simply restrict from posting. Which still allows them to access / view the site, just not add content. (status update issue excluded) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.