Jump to content

Community

Washerhelp

+Clients
  • Content Count

    124
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Washerhelp

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks. It's not a big problem, though wouldn't "Subject" be better? That would avoid confusion from newbies and autofill?
  2. Hello there. I can't remember if the "Title" entry box when creating a topic has always been called title, or did it once used to be called, "Subject"? For some strange reason I am finding recently that a lot of people are posting on my forum and instead of putting the subject in the title box they are putting, Mr, or Mrs. At first I just thought these people were a bit dim, (to be honest it's hard to argue otherwise), but I must have had about a dozen over the last six months. I can only imagine they are of the, let's say, older generation. If it's always been called title then fair enough, b
  3. That might be a good compromise. I've just had confirmation from someone at tech support that it's a common thing now where people manually join up and post apparently legitimate contributions - but including spam links. It's clear that it's only a small step to get these people to join up and not post any spam, but then edit their posts later when the topic has sunk out of sight to include spam. These links could go completely unnoticed. I'm currently using the workaround suggested earlier to limit editing of posts to 1 hour after posting. It's not ideal because it restricts genuine use
  4. Hi tonyv. Yes I can see how you would need longer editing times. The main thing is that the people running forums need the option to limit the editing time as in the vast majority of cases such as ones described by Black Tiger there is no need to edit a post after it has been replied to other than if someone spots a spelling mistake etc. This is presumably why the edited by notification was relatively recently introduced so that people can't change what they put to make a subsequent reply look weaker or pointless. I think that if Invision are not wanting to introduce a notification about wh
  5. Just a quick update to say that this has now happened to me a couple of times since posting this request. I have to confess I didn't get round to restricting the amount of time that someone can edit one of their posts as kindly suggested in one of the replies above. Needless to say I have set it to one hour now, which I presume and hope means that no one can edit any of their posts at all after one hour has past. As I speculated when I originally posted this issue it is a very clever and devious way to introduce spam. I appreciate that most spam is probably automated but if someone wants
  6. Thanks. I didn't realise you could do this. It's a workaround of sorts. Unfortunately it would restrict genuine users from being able to edit something for perfectly legitimate reasons. If the feature doesn't become available I might try setting restriction for something like 24 hours. I would hope it doesn't apply to administrators because I need the option to edit posts I've made on my own forum indefinitely.
  7. I get notification on all new posts, but can I get notifications if someone edits one of their posts? I've realised it's easy for someone to be able to get past moderators and admins with innocuous posts and return later when the topic has sunk out of sight to add spam links or inappropriate content? In a busy forum it might get noticed, but on quiet forums like mine or on unpopular topics it would go unnoticed. I would hope it's easy enough to do. We can already see if a post has been edited if we are reading it. It might not be for everyone so an option would be good. I don't expect ma
  8. Thanks ehren. I didn't think to use the control panel. I usually find files using ftp and edit them directly. Will give that a try cheers.
  9. Thanks ehren. I just had a look in the forums folder but couldn't see a stylesheet.
  10. Thanks. When my first user emailed me saying they couldn't post I checked my site, it seemed OK. So I replied back asking for more details but they didn't respond. I couldn't see any issue with my forums so I left it at that. It was only after another user emailed me a week later that I decided to contact support. That's when I saw the notice. If I'd have been notified about the identified issue I would have been able to deal with it before another user had the frustration of not being able to post. Presumably someone has to make judgement calls about these things but I don't think it would do
  11. Thanks, although the issue is about being notified of warnings rather than how to deal with these specific ones. I've sadly just found another example of this issue. Two people have recently complained that they are receiving a server error when trying to post. So I logged into my Dashboard and clicked "support/Something isn't working correctly". I was then shown another warning - "You are running the latest version, but there are known issues: An issue has been identified with PHP7.1 when using the Zend Opcache extension that may cause features on your site, such as member posting,
  12. Thanks Charles. Like many other people I run my own server supplied by a big hosting company so I have to do everything myself. It's beyond me why even the most up to date PHP comes with all these "dangerous" features switched on. If you are only checking and advising as a good will gesture (which we greatly appreciate) it seems a little disingenuous to then say but we won't actually proactively tell you. It's up to you to discover the warning yourself. I fully appreciate that these issues are technically not part of the forums, but someone at IPS thinks it's important to check these th
  13. Hi. I recently updated my forums. I took the advice of the pre-upgrade checker to get PHP 7 installed on my server. Anyway, several weeks later I happened to click on the "security" link in the control panel and found 3 warnings. One of them in red and flagged as serious. The warnings are related to the new PHP and included disabling several commands in PHP. I had done this already in the past, but updating to PHP 7 had re-enabled these apparently dangerous commands. I'm disappointed that if IPS finds serious security issues it doesn't actually tell me. Why aren't those warnings on the da
  14. Thanks. Does anyone know why sigs should be completely banished by the developers? As I say I understand how it might be desirable to have them not display in restricted space especially as many of them are just rubbish - no offence meant but I don't understand why so many things are decided by IPS with no option to override by admins. Some signatures used by admins contain useful, pertinent and even essential information.
  15. Invision Power has decided no one wants to show signatures on the mobile platform. I'm sure there's a logical reason why this might be a good idea for many forums. But I need my signature to show on my forums in the mobile version. Can it not be made an administrators choice? I give a lot of advice on my forums and need a disclaimer in my signature. This plays a very important role. I can't be the only admin with important information in their signature? Please give us more choices of how we run our forums. I need people to see my safety warnings and disclaimer. I don't care about any oth
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We use technologies, such as cookies, to customise content and advertising, to provide social media features and to analyse traffic to the site. We also share information about your use of our site with our trusted social media, advertising and analytics partners. See more about cookies and our Privacy Policy