Lindy

Good to see you around, Tiger. That is very... passionate feedback on the URL reset fee. Although it's been addressed before, I'm happy to do so again. 
Firstly, prior to limiting the resets, it was very easy to "license hop" - that is, swap URLs around, obtain support, upgrades, etc., swap them around and repeat, etc. So, while not necessarily the original intended purpose, it does help keep the honest... honest in the same sort of way that a deadbolt keeps the undetermined at bay--obviously, the determined/committed can kick the door in. 
Secondly, in many cases, there actually are costs incurred with fresh installations by way of support. Frequent URL resets are a byproduct of tossing ideas around, deleting, reinstalling, configuring and deleting. Quite often, there are numerous support requests involved and unfortunately, often the same questions/concerns over and over again on each reinstall. The spirit of tech support provided is based on a single installation and not so much to support 'tinkering' and perpetual reinstallation support. The fee, when applied, helps (in a small way) offset some of that overhead.
I would hope a number of customers here would attest to the fact that we will generally just update the URL for you if you contact us - especially if you're just changing the URL on an existing installation. In cases such as those described above, the fee may apply. 
I'm sorry you consider it a barrier, but I can assure you, we're not funding private yachts from license reset fees. 🙂 Even with license reset fees, we frankly still typically tend to have a net loss when it comes to many of those (not all, but many) that kind of toss ideas out to see what sticks. You've been around a long time (for which we're appreciative!) - you're a power user (who still sees us as a 'forum provider') and you won't likely require much support throughout your tinkering journey. That's not usually the case here. 
Just drop us a note if you find you need to change the URL on file. We're generally able to help if that's all you need. 
Thanks for the feedback. 

Good to see you around, Tiger. That is very... passionate feedback on the URL reset fee. Although it's been addressed before, I'm happy to do so again. 
Firstly, prior to limiting the resets, it was very easy to "license hop" - that is, swap URLs around, obtain support, upgrades, etc., swap them around and repeat, etc. So, while not necessarily the original intended purpose, it does help keep the honest... honest in the same sort of way that a deadbolt keeps the undetermined at bay--obviously, the determined/committed can kick the door in. 
Secondly, in many cases, there actually are costs incurred with fresh installations by way of support. Frequent URL resets are a byproduct of tossing ideas around, deleting, reinstalling, configuring and deleting. Quite often, there are numerous support requests involved and unfortunately, often the same questions/concerns over and over again on each reinstall. The spirit of tech support provided is based on a single installation and not so much to support 'tinkering' and perpetual reinstallation support. The fee, when applied, helps (in a small way) offset some of that overhead.
I would hope a number of customers here would attest to the fact that we will generally just update the URL for you if you contact us - especially if you're just changing the URL on an existing installation. In cases such as those described above, the fee may apply. 
I'm sorry you consider it a barrier, but I can assure you, we're not funding private yachts from license reset fees. 🙂 Even with license reset fees, we frankly still typically tend to have a net loss when it comes to many of those (not all, but many) that kind of toss ideas out to see what sticks. You've been around a long time (for which we're appreciative!) - you're a power user (who still sees us as a 'forum provider') and you won't likely require much support throughout your tinkering journey. That's not usually the case here. 
Just drop us a note if you find you need to change the URL on file. We're generally able to help if that's all you need. 
Thanks for the feedback. 

Good to see you around, Tiger. That is very... passionate feedback on the URL reset fee. Although it's been addressed before, I'm happy to do so again. 
Firstly, prior to limiting the resets, it was very easy to "license hop" - that is, swap URLs around, obtain support, upgrades, etc., swap them around and repeat, etc. So, while not necessarily the original intended purpose, it does help keep the honest... honest in the same sort of way that a deadbolt keeps the undetermined at bay--obviously, the determined/committed can kick the door in. 
Secondly, in many cases, there actually are costs incurred with fresh installations by way of support. Frequent URL resets are a byproduct of tossing ideas around, deleting, reinstalling, configuring and deleting. Quite often, there are numerous support requests involved and unfortunately, often the same questions/concerns over and over again on each reinstall. The spirit of tech support provided is based on a single installation and not so much to support 'tinkering' and perpetual reinstallation support. The fee, when applied, helps (in a small way) offset some of that overhead.
I would hope a number of customers here would attest to the fact that we will generally just update the URL for you if you contact us - especially if you're just changing the URL on an existing installation. In cases such as those described above, the fee may apply. 
I'm sorry you consider it a barrier, but I can assure you, we're not funding private yachts from license reset fees. 🙂 Even with license reset fees, we frankly still typically tend to have a net loss when it comes to many of those (not all, but many) that kind of toss ideas out to see what sticks. You've been around a long time (for which we're appreciative!) - you're a power user (who still sees us as a 'forum provider') and you won't likely require much support throughout your tinkering journey. That's not usually the case here. 
Just drop us a note if you find you need to change the URL on file. We're generally able to help if that's all you need. 
Thanks for the feedback. 

Good to see you around, Tiger. That is very... passionate feedback on the URL reset fee. Although it's been addressed before, I'm happy to do so again. 
Firstly, prior to limiting the resets, it was very easy to "license hop" - that is, swap URLs around, obtain support, upgrades, etc., swap them around and repeat, etc. So, while not necessarily the original intended purpose, it does help keep the honest... honest in the same sort of way that a deadbolt keeps the undetermined at bay--obviously, the determined/committed can kick the door in. 
Secondly, in many cases, there actually are costs incurred with fresh installations by way of support. Frequent URL resets are a byproduct of tossing ideas around, deleting, reinstalling, configuring and deleting. Quite often, there are numerous support requests involved and unfortunately, often the same questions/concerns over and over again on each reinstall. The spirit of tech support provided is based on a single installation and not so much to support 'tinkering' and perpetual reinstallation support. The fee, when applied, helps (in a small way) offset some of that overhead.
I would hope a number of customers here would attest to the fact that we will generally just update the URL for you if you contact us - especially if you're just changing the URL on an existing installation. In cases such as those described above, the fee may apply. 
I'm sorry you consider it a barrier, but I can assure you, we're not funding private yachts from license reset fees. 🙂 Even with license reset fees, we frankly still typically tend to have a net loss when it comes to many of those (not all, but many) that kind of toss ideas out to see what sticks. You've been around a long time (for which we're appreciative!) - you're a power user (who still sees us as a 'forum provider') and you won't likely require much support throughout your tinkering journey. That's not usually the case here. 
Just drop us a note if you find you need to change the URL on file. We're generally able to help if that's all you need. 
Thanks for the feedback. 

For clarity, the Marketplace integration in 4.5 is available and works in a test installation, using the -TESTINSTALL license, so long as your installation is reachable from the Internet. In other words, IPS needs to be able to initiate a connection to your install. If your test install is on your local machine or inside a corporate network and you haven't made provisions with your firewall or router so that it is reachable from the public internet, the integration does not work. Remember, if you do this, you need to secure your test install behind additional HTTP authentication (i.e.  htpasswd).
@Stuart Silvester goes into that here:
What doesn't presently work is:
Adding plugins and applications from the IPS Marketplace to localhost installations (that don't have the -TESTLICENSE and aren't accessible to the Internet as above). These are typically used by developers to author themes, plugins, and applications and then redistribute them privately to test and production environments, or offer them from the IPS Marketplace to others for free or at a price. Prior to this unannounced change with 4.5, you could run multiple local virtualized installs for testing and development purposes and install third party applications and plugins from the Marketplace that live only on your local machine and are not accessible from the internet. You might want to test your own local changes against an install that has the various third-party integrations you've purchased from Marketplace present and ensure there aren't any compatibility issues or things that break due to conflicts, as an example, or to ensure a theme properly works with third-party integrations. Now, you cannot get these plugins and applications into a localhost install without obtaining the files from the developer directly. The ability to download, inspect, audit, or commit to backup file repository any marketplace applications and plugins prior to installing it in any environment. This is typically done to ensure compatibility with other modifications, perform code audits and ensure that best practices have been implemented by the developer, identify any potential issues, make backups of critical functionality, retain version history in a source control system (such as git), identify bugs, etc. If the things that aren't working in the two bullet points above are important to you, @Lindy and the IPS team welcome your feedback.
For us, we do local development on a local install that lives in virtual machines on our development computers. We commit our work into source control and then when we've reached a place that we're ready to do user acceptance testing, we promote those changes into our -TESTINSTALL license that our testers can access. Once we're confident things are working there, we promote to production.
This is probably not the sort of rigor most causal administrators would bother going through, and likely not done by IPS Cloud customers. I'm not even sure they have access to run a local environment without getting a self-hosted license.

Hi guys. I'm sorry for any confusion and frustration. This is something I personally insisted upon and it was done for a multitude of reasons. 
First and foremost, we want to really promote more harmony within third party applications. 4.4, because of its looser standards that did not require authors to use versioning/update notifications, ultimately allowed a hodge podge of current and outdated resources that would collide with one another (and the core) leading to unnecessary issues, customer frustration and support overhead. With everything managed within the AdminCP, you have easy access to updates - the same as the core software. 
Requiring Marketplace apps be installed through the AdminCP also helps ensure that what you're installing is the latest the author has uploaded, it was been reviewed by IPS (our process for this has changed and improved with 4.5 and we also screen upgrades now.) If we were to permit downloads and manual installation, you would get the warning that it is an untested resource (there are no provisions in the file itself that indicate it came from the marketplace), it would be installed outside of the Marketplace management/upgrade system and things like the support tool would warn you every time you use it that you're using an untested third party application. 
I understand the use case for 'localhost' development and testing. I would consider that a niche case at this point, but later down the line, we would be happy to, if demand dictates, explore potential ways to allow manually saving a file in a manner that ensures the file and account are validated and the file operates within the Marketplace framework.  We have no immediate plans to consider that development expenditure at this time, however. 
You could reach out to the author as well with these rare circumstances, but to be honest, this change also helps them from a piracy standpoint, so they may not be willing to give up files to customers so easily and again, if they do, it would not be installed within the new Marketplace framework. 
I'm sorry again for the frustration and @Dean_ you're not being a nuisance at all. I completely understand your position. Again, should circumstances change in the future, we can re-evaluate. At this point, just slapping up the file again would defeat the entire purpose of the 4.5 Marketplace, so that's unfortunately not under consideration at this moment. 
@Paul E. I'm sorry that happened to you and we've found similar. Because of that, there are new development guidelines in place that authors must adhere to and we have become very stringent in what we will approve. 
@ibaker XF, to the best of my knowledge, doesn't even have an App Store/marketplace and they don't review any third party resource. That's respectfully an apples and oranges comparison. As a point of clarification, although you find things from Invision Community creeping into XF, we on the other hand have no interest in competing with XF. If I were to simplify the comparison in this case, they adopt more of an Android approach and we prefer the Apple approach. You can hack your Android up to pieces if that's your thing, but the beauty of an Apple device lies in its balance between power, simplicity and stability. Our core demographic has demonstrated time and again, they prefer and expect the Apple-esque approach from us. Respectfully, if Android is your thing, please don't make yourself angry and miserable by shoehorning your expectations into an Apple device and/or trying to turn Apple into Android. 🙂 
Thanks for your understanding!

In terms of downloading the resource archive, modifying and reinstalling - no, that is not possible, unless you purchase it directly through the author and install it as a custom app/plugin. 
Respectfully, that is a resource directory. As far as I know, they do not facilitate transactions like an app store (I'm told they instead direct to an author's site for payment) and I'm reasonably confident there is no official code or QA review as it has come up numerous times in sales inquiries from folks coming from XF, wanting to ensure that we do. That's not to take away from the value of the directory - it works for them (and you) and that's great. The majority of our customers have a reasonable expectation to trust that what they install from our Marketplace has been reviewed by IPS. If the Android approach works better for you - we don't take it personally. You have to decide what is important to you but you're not going to get the taste of Coke Zero in a Pepsi Max can (I prefer Coke Zero, if you were curious, but you may prefer Pepsi 😉) -- there's no point in choosing Brand A, if you just want it to mimic Brand B. 
The modern web landscape has changed significantly. There are a decreasing number of platforms that have "downloadable content." We are a point. click. install. done. society now and we've found that represents the mindset of the majority of our customer base, from personal all the way to enterprise. We've organically aligned ourselves with those who prefer and expect a more Apple-esque experience and thus, that's the direction we've been taken since the inception of Invision Community 4. We're comfortable and happy with that. We still provide the power of developing or installing applications independently of the marketplace (but there is a warning it's untested, use at your own risk, etc.) If you're using the Marketplace, we want to keep tighter control on that in the interest of security, stability and customer confidence and support. It also helps the authors which allows them to develop new and exciting things for you instead of spending that time providing additional support for installation, upgrades, issues surrounding out of date resources, etc. Poking holes back in the framework and slapping up downloads to essentially go backwards is not something we are considering at the present time, however, as I said, if the demand changes in the future, we will of course re-evaluate and if a change is warranted, we will do so in a sensible way. 
 

The AdminCP has new security mechanisms. That app needs to be updated to use CSRF protection - until it is, it will not work, unfortunately.

Imagine there will be a few tears from those that like to run Null communities with plugins

Hi guys. I'm sorry for any confusion and frustration. This is something I personally insisted upon and it was done for a multitude of reasons. 
First and foremost, we want to really promote more harmony within third party applications. 4.4, because of its looser standards that did not require authors to use versioning/update notifications, ultimately allowed a hodge podge of current and outdated resources that would collide with one another (and the core) leading to unnecessary issues, customer frustration and support overhead. With everything managed within the AdminCP, you have easy access to updates - the same as the core software. 
Requiring Marketplace apps be installed through the AdminCP also helps ensure that what you're installing is the latest the author has uploaded, it was been reviewed by IPS (our process for this has changed and improved with 4.5 and we also screen upgrades now.) If we were to permit downloads and manual installation, you would get the warning that it is an untested resource (there are no provisions in the file itself that indicate it came from the marketplace), it would be installed outside of the Marketplace management/upgrade system and things like the support tool would warn you every time you use it that you're using an untested third party application. 
I understand the use case for 'localhost' development and testing. I would consider that a niche case at this point, but later down the line, we would be happy to, if demand dictates, explore potential ways to allow manually saving a file in a manner that ensures the file and account are validated and the file operates within the Marketplace framework.  We have no immediate plans to consider that development expenditure at this time, however. 
You could reach out to the author as well with these rare circumstances, but to be honest, this change also helps them from a piracy standpoint, so they may not be willing to give up files to customers so easily and again, if they do, it would not be installed within the new Marketplace framework. 
I'm sorry again for the frustration and @Dean_ you're not being a nuisance at all. I completely understand your position. Again, should circumstances change in the future, we can re-evaluate. At this point, just slapping up the file again would defeat the entire purpose of the 4.5 Marketplace, so that's unfortunately not under consideration at this moment. 
@Paul E. I'm sorry that happened to you and we've found similar. Because of that, there are new development guidelines in place that authors must adhere to and we have become very stringent in what we will approve. 
@ibaker XF, to the best of my knowledge, doesn't even have an App Store/marketplace and they don't review any third party resource. That's respectfully an apples and oranges comparison. As a point of clarification, although you find things from Invision Community creeping into XF, we on the other hand have no interest in competing with XF. If I were to simplify the comparison in this case, they adopt more of an Android approach and we prefer the Apple approach. You can hack your Android up to pieces if that's your thing, but the beauty of an Apple device lies in its balance between power, simplicity and stability. Our core demographic has demonstrated time and again, they prefer and expect the Apple-esque approach from us. Respectfully, if Android is your thing, please don't make yourself angry and miserable by shoehorning your expectations into an Apple device and/or trying to turn Apple into Android. 🙂 
Thanks for your understanding!

Hi guys. I'm sorry for any confusion and frustration. This is something I personally insisted upon and it was done for a multitude of reasons. 
First and foremost, we want to really promote more harmony within third party applications. 4.4, because of its looser standards that did not require authors to use versioning/update notifications, ultimately allowed a hodge podge of current and outdated resources that would collide with one another (and the core) leading to unnecessary issues, customer frustration and support overhead. With everything managed within the AdminCP, you have easy access to updates - the same as the core software. 
Requiring Marketplace apps be installed through the AdminCP also helps ensure that what you're installing is the latest the author has uploaded, it was been reviewed by IPS (our process for this has changed and improved with 4.5 and we also screen upgrades now.) If we were to permit downloads and manual installation, you would get the warning that it is an untested resource (there are no provisions in the file itself that indicate it came from the marketplace), it would be installed outside of the Marketplace management/upgrade system and things like the support tool would warn you every time you use it that you're using an untested third party application. 
I understand the use case for 'localhost' development and testing. I would consider that a niche case at this point, but later down the line, we would be happy to, if demand dictates, explore potential ways to allow manually saving a file in a manner that ensures the file and account are validated and the file operates within the Marketplace framework.  We have no immediate plans to consider that development expenditure at this time, however. 
You could reach out to the author as well with these rare circumstances, but to be honest, this change also helps them from a piracy standpoint, so they may not be willing to give up files to customers so easily and again, if they do, it would not be installed within the new Marketplace framework. 
I'm sorry again for the frustration and @Dean_ you're not being a nuisance at all. I completely understand your position. Again, should circumstances change in the future, we can re-evaluate. At this point, just slapping up the file again would defeat the entire purpose of the 4.5 Marketplace, so that's unfortunately not under consideration at this moment. 
@Paul E. I'm sorry that happened to you and we've found similar. Because of that, there are new development guidelines in place that authors must adhere to and we have become very stringent in what we will approve. 
@ibaker XF, to the best of my knowledge, doesn't even have an App Store/marketplace and they don't review any third party resource. That's respectfully an apples and oranges comparison. As a point of clarification, although you find things from Invision Community creeping into XF, we on the other hand have no interest in competing with XF. If I were to simplify the comparison in this case, they adopt more of an Android approach and we prefer the Apple approach. You can hack your Android up to pieces if that's your thing, but the beauty of an Apple device lies in its balance between power, simplicity and stability. Our core demographic has demonstrated time and again, they prefer and expect the Apple-esque approach from us. Respectfully, if Android is your thing, please don't make yourself angry and miserable by shoehorning your expectations into an Apple device and/or trying to turn Apple into Android. 🙂 
Thanks for your understanding!

Hi guys. I'm sorry for any confusion and frustration. This is something I personally insisted upon and it was done for a multitude of reasons. 
First and foremost, we want to really promote more harmony within third party applications. 4.4, because of its looser standards that did not require authors to use versioning/update notifications, ultimately allowed a hodge podge of current and outdated resources that would collide with one another (and the core) leading to unnecessary issues, customer frustration and support overhead. With everything managed within the AdminCP, you have easy access to updates - the same as the core software. 
Requiring Marketplace apps be installed through the AdminCP also helps ensure that what you're installing is the latest the author has uploaded, it was been reviewed by IPS (our process for this has changed and improved with 4.5 and we also screen upgrades now.) If we were to permit downloads and manual installation, you would get the warning that it is an untested resource (there are no provisions in the file itself that indicate it came from the marketplace), it would be installed outside of the Marketplace management/upgrade system and things like the support tool would warn you every time you use it that you're using an untested third party application. 
I understand the use case for 'localhost' development and testing. I would consider that a niche case at this point, but later down the line, we would be happy to, if demand dictates, explore potential ways to allow manually saving a file in a manner that ensures the file and account are validated and the file operates within the Marketplace framework.  We have no immediate plans to consider that development expenditure at this time, however. 
You could reach out to the author as well with these rare circumstances, but to be honest, this change also helps them from a piracy standpoint, so they may not be willing to give up files to customers so easily and again, if they do, it would not be installed within the new Marketplace framework. 
I'm sorry again for the frustration and @Dean_ you're not being a nuisance at all. I completely understand your position. Again, should circumstances change in the future, we can re-evaluate. At this point, just slapping up the file again would defeat the entire purpose of the 4.5 Marketplace, so that's unfortunately not under consideration at this moment. 
@Paul E. I'm sorry that happened to you and we've found similar. Because of that, there are new development guidelines in place that authors must adhere to and we have become very stringent in what we will approve. 
@ibaker XF, to the best of my knowledge, doesn't even have an App Store/marketplace and they don't review any third party resource. That's respectfully an apples and oranges comparison. As a point of clarification, although you find things from Invision Community creeping into XF, we on the other hand have no interest in competing with XF. If I were to simplify the comparison in this case, they adopt more of an Android approach and we prefer the Apple approach. You can hack your Android up to pieces if that's your thing, but the beauty of an Apple device lies in its balance between power, simplicity and stability. Our core demographic has demonstrated time and again, they prefer and expect the Apple-esque approach from us. Respectfully, if Android is your thing, please don't make yourself angry and miserable by shoehorning your expectations into an Apple device and/or trying to turn Apple into Android. 🙂 
Thanks for your understanding!

Hi guys. I'm sorry for any confusion and frustration. This is something I personally insisted upon and it was done for a multitude of reasons. 
First and foremost, we want to really promote more harmony within third party applications. 4.4, because of its looser standards that did not require authors to use versioning/update notifications, ultimately allowed a hodge podge of current and outdated resources that would collide with one another (and the core) leading to unnecessary issues, customer frustration and support overhead. With everything managed within the AdminCP, you have easy access to updates - the same as the core software. 
Requiring Marketplace apps be installed through the AdminCP also helps ensure that what you're installing is the latest the author has uploaded, it was been reviewed by IPS (our process for this has changed and improved with 4.5 and we also screen upgrades now.) If we were to permit downloads and manual installation, you would get the warning that it is an untested resource (there are no provisions in the file itself that indicate it came from the marketplace), it would be installed outside of the Marketplace management/upgrade system and things like the support tool would warn you every time you use it that you're using an untested third party application. 
I understand the use case for 'localhost' development and testing. I would consider that a niche case at this point, but later down the line, we would be happy to, if demand dictates, explore potential ways to allow manually saving a file in a manner that ensures the file and account are validated and the file operates within the Marketplace framework.  We have no immediate plans to consider that development expenditure at this time, however. 
You could reach out to the author as well with these rare circumstances, but to be honest, this change also helps them from a piracy standpoint, so they may not be willing to give up files to customers so easily and again, if they do, it would not be installed within the new Marketplace framework. 
I'm sorry again for the frustration and @Dean_ you're not being a nuisance at all. I completely understand your position. Again, should circumstances change in the future, we can re-evaluate. At this point, just slapping up the file again would defeat the entire purpose of the 4.5 Marketplace, so that's unfortunately not under consideration at this moment. 
@Paul E. I'm sorry that happened to you and we've found similar. Because of that, there are new development guidelines in place that authors must adhere to and we have become very stringent in what we will approve. 
@ibaker XF, to the best of my knowledge, doesn't even have an App Store/marketplace and they don't review any third party resource. That's respectfully an apples and oranges comparison. As a point of clarification, although you find things from Invision Community creeping into XF, we on the other hand have no interest in competing with XF. If I were to simplify the comparison in this case, they adopt more of an Android approach and we prefer the Apple approach. You can hack your Android up to pieces if that's your thing, but the beauty of an Apple device lies in its balance between power, simplicity and stability. Our core demographic has demonstrated time and again, they prefer and expect the Apple-esque approach from us. Respectfully, if Android is your thing, please don't make yourself angry and miserable by shoehorning your expectations into an Apple device and/or trying to turn Apple into Android. 🙂 
Thanks for your understanding!

Naturally, we try to consider anything that gains traction, however, this goes against the grain of every aspect of life. No where else that I'm aware of, other than "old school" forums, are those that have been subjected to disciplined paraded in front of the public with a naughty tag. I'm not aware of any social media platform that indicates a user has been banned or disciplined. Imagine getting a sticker placed on your car after getting a speeding ticket to let the world know you had your hand slapped. We are not likely to incorporate any feature that promotes public humiliation of members. 
As a tip for moderation - if content is being reported and you find it rises to the level of banning a user, the usual course of action would be to remove the offending content. You cited letting users know someone has been banned so they stop replying, but removing the content would accomplish this as well. 
If you're insistent on this, please consider using a third party resource or custom user group is likely your best option. You are, however, likely going to receive a higher number of GDPR "right to be forgotten" requests if you start publicly shaming your members for moderation actions taken. 

I'm very sorry for the inconvenience, confusion and poor handling of this issue. Although this functionality has existed for quite some time, this was not identified as a widespread / abused issue until recently. When the growing concern was brought to management attention, we acted as quickly as possible. 
A red warning banner should display for anyone impacted; I apologize if it didn't for some of you initially. We have corrected the issue - pushing remote notifications to AdminCPs is not a system we use very often, so there was a kink. 
Once again, my sincerest apologies for the ball being dropped on this; it is, as you know, not typical of and we will do our best to ensure it doesn't happen again. 
 

Naturally, we try to consider anything that gains traction, however, this goes against the grain of every aspect of life. No where else that I'm aware of, other than "old school" forums, are those that have been subjected to disciplined paraded in front of the public with a naughty tag. I'm not aware of any social media platform that indicates a user has been banned or disciplined. Imagine getting a sticker placed on your car after getting a speeding ticket to let the world know you had your hand slapped. We are not likely to incorporate any feature that promotes public humiliation of members. 
As a tip for moderation - if content is being reported and you find it rises to the level of banning a user, the usual course of action would be to remove the offending content. You cited letting users know someone has been banned so they stop replying, but removing the content would accomplish this as well. 
If you're insistent on this, please consider using a third party resource or custom user group is likely your best option. You are, however, likely going to receive a higher number of GDPR "right to be forgotten" requests if you start publicly shaming your members for moderation actions taken. 

I’m excited to come out from behind the scenes to say, Hello! 👋
The IPS team has been incredibly welcoming to me in so many ways! The willingness to try and adopt new processes is passing along better results to you guys! I’m happy to be part of such a driven, hardworking group! Dedicated leadership, a well-rounded team and eager clients have made this year with IPS a great one for me!
Thank you for your feedback, @DesignzShop. Keep it coming!

Awesome! Thanks for the positive feedback - that's exactly what we wanted to hear! 
I'd love to take credit, but it's definitely not me - it's really a cumulation of an amazing development team, new processes and the addition of @Olivia Clarkto the team last year. I'm extremely proud of everyone at IPS; we're very fortunate! 
Thanks again. 4.5 is the best yet. 🙂 

Awesome! Thanks for the positive feedback - that's exactly what we wanted to hear! 
I'd love to take credit, but it's definitely not me - it's really a cumulation of an amazing development team, new processes and the addition of @Olivia Clarkto the team last year. I'm extremely proud of everyone at IPS; we're very fortunate! 
Thanks again. 4.5 is the best yet. 🙂 

I considered starting a rivalry but you all are great as you well know.
Edit: You know if you're my favorite. 😉

Sometimes I feel compelled to speak out with regards to a service, it doesn't happen very often but today I do feel compelled to say something about the support given by Invision.
It's First Class!
I've noticed, over the years, that some users post quite disparaging words for the support given, but I've never experience this myself and I truly believe that you have to give praise where it's due, just as much as you have to voice concerns when things are not going right.
I'd like to say thank you to all of the staff who have dealt with any issues I've raised, but in particular to @Marc Stridgen who has always been professional and always sorted out any issues I raised via ticket in a very speedy, precise and concise way.
It's because of this professionalism that I have and always will use Invision and continue to recommend it to my own clients when I believe it will fulfil their needs.
Thank you guy's and gals, each and every one of you.

I prefer the shadow ban status. My members don't need to know if I've banned someone. Its none of their business. I don't need them nosing in on someone elses' business either.

Awesome! Thanks for the positive feedback - that's exactly what we wanted to hear! 
I'd love to take credit, but it's definitely not me - it's really a cumulation of an amazing development team, new processes and the addition of @Olivia Clarkto the team last year. I'm extremely proud of everyone at IPS; we're very fortunate! 
Thanks again. 4.5 is the best yet. 🙂 

Awesome! Thanks for the positive feedback - that's exactly what we wanted to hear! 
I'd love to take credit, but it's definitely not me - it's really a cumulation of an amazing development team, new processes and the addition of @Olivia Clarkto the team last year. I'm extremely proud of everyone at IPS; we're very fortunate! 
Thanks again. 4.5 is the best yet. 🙂 

Awesome! Thanks for the positive feedback - that's exactly what we wanted to hear! 
I'd love to take credit, but it's definitely not me - it's really a cumulation of an amazing development team, new processes and the addition of @Olivia Clarkto the team last year. I'm extremely proud of everyone at IPS; we're very fortunate! 
Thanks again. 4.5 is the best yet. 🙂