TSP

Hello, Send them a ticket and ask nicely to do the file upload. As far as I’ve heard they are willing to do some uploads on request.

Only correct answer is obviously to buy 1600 self hosted Invision Community Licences with all the applications.

You have a feature where changing the terms presents you with an option to have members re-accept them. Two improvements I'd like (And which I personally was surprised was not already a part of it) 1) Add one or more ways to log out. You could present a "Log out and continue browsing as a guest"-option besides the accept-button. There is no way you can log out now (besides deleting cookies) 2) Make the contact us-link at the bottom work for this page. It fails now. People should be able to contact and ask any questions they might have about the change. Maybe that could also be presented as a button besides the Accept-button.

@Brainy S. Sorry for my late reply. I've noted this, but I'm not sure when I'll be able to spend time adding it. If it is added I think it's going to be a setting whether it should remember that you posted anonymously previously in the topic or not. Currently it's intentional, as I don't want to reveal the identity of who posted anonymously, even in those cases where the person that posted something anonymously is the same person being logged in. (Which is also why I don't allow people to edit their own anonymous posts either etc.)

Hi, When a device has been unused for 90 days it no longer will log you automatically in. However, unless I'm missing something, there is no cleanup done when a device has been deemed as expired. I guess there could be other reasons for keeping it, for example the device log that is now available when you view the member in the adminCP, but I would still like for the information to be cleaned up after some time. #GDPR? Maybe add an extra retention setting for this or let it be deleted additional three months after it has expired or something.

If you read my original comment on the blog post, you'll see that I've already suggested using a random value, which I think would be the best approach. I also replied to someone addressing concerns regarding data mining and pattern matching. My suggestion is not to remove the current nuclear approach of no attribution for those wishing to play it supersafe. IPS could even give a cute little button next to the text input that could generate a random alphanumeric value for it! I removed my member ID sentence from the post now, to avoid any more confusion and focus on it (since it was a weak suggestion on my part)

(Since the support for this seems quite substantial, with 28 likes, one "Thank you" and four supporting comments I thought I would also suggest it in a feedback topic for further discussion.) Currently on deletion of member you can choose Keep attribution as is (member name) Set it to blank (Only shows as "Guest" Suggestion: Give us an option to freely choose author attribution by giving us a text input

Yeah, I know. I just feel like so many "modern designs" just go all-in on mobile, where they simply make everything bigger on desktop, even the mobile menu icon, but doesn't actually utilize the advantages of desktop size. It's like they do "Mobile only" instead.

Maybe it’s just me, but to me IPS already feels mobile friendly, and mobile first. Please don’t do the mistake many do when doing mobile first, like having a mobile menu on desktop.

I personally hope you'll consider changing px-values for font-sizes etc. with something less "set in stone". Like using rem-units where it can be applied or for example no unit type where it can be applied (line-height being the only one I really know about for that atm.)

The Who's active-block is suddenly on 4.3 displaying who is currently using the editor / writing a post. There seems to be no built-in way to remove this, other than removing the block or removing the permission to see who's active for member groups. For any users of my plugin (Post Anonymously) for example, this is quite the privacy concern. Please make this optional :)

Hi Matt, After upgrading to 4.3 I'm still unable to configure Redis with multiple readers. What am I missing?

But other parts of account history is unnesseary. For example, do you need to know that someone changed from mypreviousmail@myjob.com to unemployednow@yahoo.com for a year? You are perfectly able to make a good argument for keeping such entries for some months after the member changed it, but you're really stretching it when it goes beyond a year for some of the information they store to account history now.

@Matt @Christopher Anderson Well, it's pseudonymized at least. We personally take this road, so it will be useful to me if IPS would provide the option to let us input our own value to give as the new attribution. You can argue people can comb through all of the quoted content in others members posts and get the information that way anyway, or you could argue that an advanced AI in the future could be able to figure out which users are different anyway based on writing style alone. I see no need to make it harder for people to understand how the flow of a previous conversation has been (if you choose not to delete the content in the first place), it only makes things confusing. There are 4 potential options here: Continue to attribute to Name (currently in this update) Attribute to "Guest" only (currently in this update) Attribute to the given name <Admin inputs new name> Pseudonymize: The software generates a md5-hash based on some values there and then that does not retrieve any member data, just something like a timestamp + some other value and then gives that name to all content from that account before it's deleted. @Matt Will I be able to hook into it at least?

@Matt On deletion of members: Could there be an option to define the name to attribute to on that page directly? So we could input for example "Member 3312" (where 3312 would be their memberId). This will keep the discussion still somewhat reader friendly, so it would still be possible to differentiate different accounts as having written in the discussion, for readers reading old content. Alternatively let the Anonymize attribution do a md5 hash on the (memberId+some community specific value that is unlikely to be changed) and grab the first 8 letters or something.