Mark

Looking at your most recent tickets:

608369: We waited for you to accept our disclaimer, which you eventually refused to do and closed the ticket yourself.
606915: We responded about 4 hours after the ticket creation.
604629: We responded about 40 minutes after the ticket creation.
603845: We initially responded about 15 minutes after the ticket creation, and then you replied on a Saturday, and even then we got back to you about 8 hours later.

In fact, I can't see any tickets that have been open anywhere near 48 hours. I see one that is open now, but that was also only created yesterday.

Am I missing something? If you can provide the ticket IDs for the cases your referring to where you've had to wait, we can see what's going on.

Looking at your most recent tickets:

608369: We waited for you to accept our disclaimer, which you eventually refused to do and closed the ticket yourself.
606915: We responded about 4 hours after the ticket creation.
604629: We responded about 40 minutes after the ticket creation.
603845: We initially responded about 15 minutes after the ticket creation, and then you replied on a Saturday, and even then we got back to you about 8 hours later.

In fact, I can't see any tickets that have been open anywhere near 48 hours. I see one that is open now, but that was also only created yesterday.

Am I missing something? If you can provide the ticket IDs for the cases your referring to where you've had to wait, we can see what's going on.

Skins should continue to function so long as you apply the changes in the skin difference report we provide.

Point changes are only bug fixes - we don't "change our minds every twenty seconds" - if there is a bug in the skin... we have to fix it ;)

It's not that simple though, is it?

When we get tickets from people saying "my board is slow" - if our response is something along the lines of "Well you're using a resource intensive feature on a huge site on a shared server - turn it off and you'll be fine", it rarely goes down well ;)
"But my board depends on it!", "You shouldn't advertise a feature that doesn't work!", etc...

It's not that simple though, is it?

When we get tickets from people saying "my board is slow" - if our response is something along the lines of "Well you're using a resource intensive feature on a huge site on a shared server - turn it off and you'll be fine", it rarely goes down well ;)
"But my board depends on it!", "You shouldn't advertise a feature that doesn't work!", etc...

Michael is correct, it is certainly possible, although it's a bit of a long shot.

I don't think it's really appropriate to speculate on what has happened to a particular site - if the owner has concerns they will contact us and we will investigate what happened. At the moment there are no known vulnerabilities in IP.Board's latest supported versions (3.0.3 or 2.3.6).

It is actually feasible. IPS might have added a security check into some random form's template in a new release, and the custom skin failed to include that, thus opening a hole for some type of injection or other malicious activity.

Tom,

We're kind of going round in circles here. I don't know whether it's just that you don't like the new system, or you're having trouble finding what you need.

If there is something in particular that you are having trouble finding documentation on, please let me know and I will either direct you to it or get something written up if it is not available, but continuously making blanket statements of our documentation lacking doesn't help us help you. Tell us what you want, and we will do our best to provide.

If it's just that you don't like the idea of inline help and would prefer a single manual, then I'm sorry to hear that, but it's what the majority of our customers asked for.

Martin is correct though ;)

1st: I've created a bug report, but in future, that's where they go ;)

2nd: I've never noticed it, but if you could create a bug report with a link - we'd appreciate it.

3rd: Like martin says: log in with the same Email address and password, if it doesn't work - contact our account assistance department (through a support ticket) and they'll sort that out for you :)

If they did something like this, then some folks would complain that they should be included in the group. Should a person who created one really big nice mod be in the group? Or should a person who created 10 small mods that don't really work be in the group? It's too hard to come up with reliable guidelines that they can set as the group requirement, and IPS has enough on their plate as it is.

That's a sentence where it's REALLY important to say "you're" versus "your". :whistle:

We have been looking into this issue, but as far as I am aware, nobody so far has been able to reliably reproduce it - if a board is only using hooks we've provided, it works fine (as proven by this forum).
In fact, from what I've seen, it is particular hooks that are causing the problem. We've just been unable to track down why. What hooks do you have installed?

We have been looking into this issue, but as far as I am aware, nobody so far has been able to reliably reproduce it - if a board is only using hooks we've provided, it works fine (as proven by this forum).
In fact, from what I've seen, it is particular hooks that are causing the problem. We've just been unable to track down why. What hooks do you have installed?

We have been looking into this issue, but as far as I am aware, nobody so far has been able to reliably reproduce it - if a board is only using hooks we've provided, it works fine (as proven by this forum).
In fact, from what I've seen, it is particular hooks that are causing the problem. We've just been unable to track down why. What hooks do you have installed?

That makes the support techs angry :P

That makes the support techs angry :P

Doing this would delete (physically, not just moved to trash) any posts currently invisible:

DELETE FROM posts WHERE queued=1
You would then have to rebuild topics and then forums.

Unfortunately, there's not an easy way to just move them to the trash can - a post cannot exist without a topic, and it's not possible (realistically) to generate a topic to put the post in using an SQL query.

For #2 - this is something I debated for a while... IPB has no feature comparable to vB's soft delete. It's not *really* possible for the converter to move them to a trash can as that would require first creating a topic for them - which would slow down the converter (and posts conversion is already intensive).

The best thing for you to do is probably to run a SQL query to just delete them all, then rebuild topics and forums.

I will keep it in mind though... perhaps add a setting to ask users what they want to do with them.

Both the things you asked for are covered in the inline help.

For adding a custom profile field go to Admin CP --> Members --> Custom Profile Fields (you could also type "custom profile fields" in the search box to end up here") - then click "Add Field" and then "Get Help With This Page".
This has detailed description of the settings, and some examples of how to use them.

For Facebook Connect - go to Admin CP --> Tools & Settings --> System --> Facebook Connect (you could also type "facebook connect" in the search box to end up here") - then click "Get Help With This Page".
This gives an overview of Facebook Connect and has a link to an article which walks you through setting it up.

Your server doesn't meet the requirements for IP.Board 3.0 - specifically, you don't have PHP5 installed.

Your host will normally install it for you if you ask them and you can download our requirements checker script here to check you have everything you need.

If you have any other questions or concerns, please submit a ticket or post in this forum. Thanks :)

I'm afraid we don't have the resources to do that sort of thing. When a fix is simple we sometimes post a patch. When it's not so simple, it would be an extreme waste of our time to try to post instructions for every patch and then have our support department have access to every patch. Further to that, the patches have not yet undergone QA testing, so it's possible they could break other things.

While I'm sure when you are affected by an issue you want it fixed as soon as possible, we have to stick to some sort of organization that will benefit all of our customers in the most efficient manner. Fixing reported issues and then releasing an update to address those issues is pretty much the norm in this industry.

I have responded to your ticket.

Please let me know if you have any other questions or concerns.

We have recently introduced a few internal changes to the ticket system that has enabled us to better prioritise tickets :)

We have recently introduced a few internal changes to the ticket system that has enabled us to better prioritise tickets :)

You were promised lifetime support and upgrades and that promise has been kept.
This service is not support - it is new service that we never promised or announced or even mentioned before.
There are of course costs involved with maintaining this service and so it has been made available only to holders of a current, active license.
You are of course welcome to remain on the license you purchased, with the terms that were promised to you at the time, or pay for this new service :)



Integrate how? :)