Morrigan

I have been a little AWOL for the last year and so I haven't upgraded a lot recently. I went ahead and did an upgrade from 4.6.9 to 4.6.11 beta 1 to settle down and get looking around.

I fixed my template issue with global template but once that was resolved I noted that none of my blocks (which all use customized templates) are using their code in any way shape or form which is totally screwing up a lot of things.

(Please note this is with the default theme but even here I shouldn't see half of this information) With its custom template it should look something like this:

What it appears to be doing on all of my custom record feed templates is just outputting the default feed template which is recordrow.

• I've cleared site cache.
• I've re-saved the block with its custom code.
• I have verified that the code is correct in the block settings.

Not sure where to go from here. Thanks.

On 5/26/2021 at 11:02 PM, jackflash said:

report that e-mail address to Google:

https://support.google.com/mail/contact/abuse

If the email really exists this wouldn't help anything since the Contact Us doesn't require an email verification.

However, I thought it obeyed the ban filter but it doesn't appear to. I get those same spam messages.

28 minutes ago, kmk said:

I need this, someone can do something before IPS add it as part of core? 

In my use case, I need invite contributors for a topic or a category, or article, then only them can see that collaboration content. 

Please use the requests forum as this is wholly intended for Pages, not forums. Thanks.

17 minutes ago, Jimi Wikman said:

Ah, so more of an invitation feature to collaborate on a database entry where both would be "authors"?

 

Correct.

On 4/22/2021 at 10:15 AM, Morrigan said:

Again, I don't think this is a feature that needs to be added to forums. This is a feature that needs to be added to pages. Pages has its own thing and I think that Topics need to be unique to the users and SHOULD NOT be shared by multiple people. Pages articles/records, on the other hand, should have this capability especially on large sites where you want content submitters but not necessarily a million moderators.

Its like "group blog" adjacent but at the article/record level of pages where you can add those that are permitted to make changes to the article that are non-staff members.

So:

1. I own an article but I need you @Jordan Invision to be able to edit the article because you're a person that knows about the subject/article/company/listing/thing that the article is about.
2. I add you as "additional editors" or whatever you want to call it. Now, even though you're not a mod/admin you have the "can edit" functionality on my article, you can click edit and make changes as needed but I still own the article.
3. Then, lets say you are no longer the business on this article and or no longer interested in updating it. I can remove you and add someone else to edit said article.

 

That mod only works if you are also using the "account switcher" mod and you allow people to create accounts that multiple people can log into. Which is technically the only solution for what I'm asking for at the moment but the account security there makes me cringe.

On 4/21/2021 at 7:39 PM, Morrigan said:

I don’t want this suggestion to get diluted! Please!!

I am looking for the ability to say “this is my article but I trust person1, person23 and person 1007 to make changes” and from there they have the same rights as the owner to make changes to the article.

I’m not exclusively talking about wiki editing in which doesn’t have a real owner and all members can edit. Wiki editing has a mess of its own that needs to be solved first before this feature is permissible.

1 minute ago, Jimi Wikman said:

Sort of like the group blog feature that the Blog have?

In a Wiki-like page it would be nice to list all contributors rather than original poster. How to present this would depend a bit on the amount of contributors though....

If we have this information available in the templates, then we should be able to modify it accordingly....

Sounds like there might be a link or similar in it that its detecting as being bad but not throwing an error like it should.

I recommend clearing you browser cache/cookies for the site and the site cache (IPS Admin > Support > Something isn't working correctly)

You have to create another database relationship field. You can't include multiple databases in a single field, this is intended. But you can still style it all the same.

I feel like just having a field makes it seem compulsory. Even if its not. Even if you can leave it blank. I'm a completionist. Seeing a blank field that I CAN fill out makes me feel icky (blame games) but then what if you make it a part of profile completion? Even if its not required if its not filled in then it is forever at 99% complete.

I also tend to X out of sites that have this sort of thing because it means that my gender or my gender identity is more important than my contributions to the community when it means very little to me what you identify as.

For me this sort of thing reminds me of the call centers that are in the Philippines or India where they are all named Steve or Julia. You know that's likely not their real name but at the end of the day does it matter?

Not sure I understand the issue here. This sounds like a setting issue. There is a setting to allow multiple. I know because I have relationship fields that relate multiple items:

I vote no. Leave it to a plugin.

If there were one I'd like to put my true identification which is none of the above listed. I identify as a "Rainbow Princess Unicorn of the Fourth Order" in which I would feel both left out and angry because my identification isn't listed there.

I feel that this is a niche need and therefore needs a niche solution. Plugin. Plugin. Plugin.

Edit: To be clear I joke because I believe that this opens up a pathway for people to attack others because of their gender preference. I have removed gender options completely from my community and people can choose to identify in their introduction, in their about me or not at all. It is up to them to make that choice, not me.

I mean the cancel is to close out of it.

1) plenty of themes are available.

2) I believe just an average of your users which includes guests, bots and logged in members but you should probably submit a ticket to clarify this.

3) IPS has some big sites listed on their main page that uses their software.

4) Yes. It’s in a clients only section of the site.

While interesting this interferes with the default browser behaviors on Apple phones. 

3 hours ago, Linux-Is-Best said:

That is a possibility. I had only taken their question at face value.

Okay. Which at face value, to me, is a database record from the pages app to a forum topic since this is an IPS support forum. 😉 

@Matt Finger @Matt this is an issue with gallery. Can you confirm?

To recap:

Gallery images and gallery comments are not properly triggering content count updates.

6 hours ago, marklcfc said:

Why has everything ended up shortform? topics on board index fair enough, but posts/reputation, not sure they really need to be shortform. Users like to see there true amount.

I mean I don’t care about the true amount. Short form is sufficient for probably most end users. Once you hit 1K posts does it really matter if you know it’s 1,060 or 1,003?

6 hours ago, Linux-Is-Best said:

I wouldn't say I like this answer. 😅  The overall answer is "yes." Virtually (almost) any content from any database can be converted. Out of the box? It depends on what the source is (was it a forum?). But even if a current important does not exist, you can have one developed. 

To be clear I believe they are talking about a pages database to a topic which is not natively possible. 

@niKee at this time there is not. No.

How so? The first one is at the top of my profile where you said it didn’t exist anymore. It’s still a prominent feature of a profile. 

If you re-read @Daniel F's post the end of that is more important "excluding inconsequential cosmetic changes that require no backend changes." Basically if you are providing a theme hook that if "Profile field is filled in, replace achievement title with custom title" I doubt that's going to be a big thing. There is a limited impact to the front end, which is why there is this provisional term. You're not re-implementing next and previous titles for the topic pagination that causes EXTREME lag on large communities because the functionality itself was just massive. I've seen it take down sites with millions of posts.

So I assume this is an Seo thing but since you’re moving it... it actually doesn’t matter.

10 hours ago, Afrodude said:

First suggestion, we need a "Copy forum to database" option. It is really hard whenever you decide you want to make a new database for new project that already has been using forum has 500 topics more or less, and then move them one by one. 

Second suggestion, whenever you copy topic to database it has all options, but the time stamp. It's really would be great if you guys add this.

The first one is an issue with required fields. Not all databases are created equal. So not really possible.

The second, sounds like a permissions issue:

The achievements system doesn't exclusively rely on reputation for ranks @Luuuk

7 hours ago, IP-Gamers said:

Such huge banners are meaningless.

Its a good thing your opinion doesn't matter in this case.