13.

For my communities, I fixed this issue showing the unique ID of the post. You can see it in action here.

I am onboard with IPS for long, and here is my positive feedback on the current state of the nation:
 
- I love the strategy of moving from Pure forum to communities, with a tightly integrantes set of apps. This was a crucial move that allowed IPS to escape from the fierce competitivo on a shrinking market. As everybody knows, fóruns are disappearing, yet people are still getting together. This is why i prefer IPS package Over XF ir VB because there is a whole set of tightly packed tools to get my people collaborating.
- I love the new theme. "Oh it's too white" "oh só much white space"... For me it is definitely a great step forward. Is ir perfect? No, but it was definitely a major step forward!
- Integrations! We are not alone in the cyberspace, and there are many great apps and services out there. Integration with Zapier will be a major leap um interoperability and would allow IPS users to extract more value of their communities. I am looking forward to see IPS on Zapier, it os just taking too long.
- Support. Has been great. Thanks!
 
 
There is also less positive aspects, most related to pricing, business and evolution of the compromise with customers through time,  but now it is not the time to talk about that.

Having the marketplace inside of the application in the ACP is a good idea, but - access to the marketplace is governed by having a current license renewal in place.  This means that if a license has expired and the user does not wish to renew at this point in time (for whatever reasons), if their site has a catastrophic failure and they need to reinstall from scratch, the applications they have purchase which need to be reinstalled, what happens to them?  Will they be available in the ACP or will they need to renew their license before they can access what they have paid for?
I believe that the option to install from the ACP should be retained as it's helpful, but the option to download what you have paid for should also be made available.  After all, it is we the users who have paid for this app or plugin.  Thoughts?

Totally agree. You buy an APP, you retain the right to use it, regardless of having an active IPS licence.

Agree with You ( @Davyc and @xtech) 100 %. Wrote before that our paid files are stealed from us and got warning because of criticsm. Will never buy something from Donatorplace (Marketplace) and will never renew my paid files because my paid files will have on my computer and used when i need them (and also protect them on my way). IPS do not need protect my paid files because they can not protect their owns (allready you can download 4.5.2 whole package - nulled).
Will buy something only on developers site in future. Bought Ipsproarcade - on developers site and had never problems (you can not find nulled arcade) - developer protected his files = Bravo - teach lesson IPS.
@Lindyyou can give me another warning but i understand You - criticsm is not welcome here but kissing ass is ok!

Wow, I love this minimalistic quoting that doesn't take up space:


Invision is so dated 😞

Better not just Amazon, but also (at least) FFmpeg.

Members would like the choice to select from one of the available forum views (grid, traditional forum view, simplified listing with filters) and have that value persist across sessions on their member account. After submitting a support request, we were informed that this setting is stored in a cookie. Members clearing cookies, using multiple devices, or browing incognito are not having this value saved.
This should be a user account setting, restored upon login regardless of whether or not cookies are stored.

Currently, there are no config options when following a member, so it's just binary following/not following. This means that you have to opt into all or nothing for being notified about new content posted by your followees - there's no way to follow a member for status updates only.
It would make sense if the follow dialog when following a member let you choose between "status updates only" and "all content".
Implementing this would be pretty straight forward I believe - just update the special casing of following members in \IPS\core\front\modules\system\notifications::follow to add another option for status updates only, then update the follow types checked when sending status notifications to include that type. Unfortunately the aforementioned follow method is basically unhookable because it constructs and uses the form in the same method without exposing it to hooks.

It looks like one important question was missed in the off-topic messages flow:

For increased privacy, please offer youtube-nocookie.com and adding &rel=0 to auto-embeds for YouTube videos.
Safari 14 now makes it trivially easy to see what trackers are trying to follow you on what web sites. Cheers.
 

For such a thing you can use the Follow system but choose not to notify you of activity or you can use your browser's built-in bookmark feature.

Why on earth would you be able to flag another moderator as a spammer?
The ability to be flagged as a spammer should be a usergroup permission item, or the tool should have a list of groups that it can be used with.

While using forums or ips platform, is necessary to save some posts, topics, or whatever content for future access, there are Follow and I like features, but still miss Saved Content feature. So many time I want to revisit some technical posts, but I lost in the search functionality...

It would be lovely if the next IPS major upgrade were to provide administrators with a walkthrough of all new configuration options either during the upgrade or post-upgrade. This would help us identify what settings and features have new behavior or options that did not exist prior to the upgrade, so we can make decisions on what appropriate values would be to set. Some effort was made for an onboarding experience for new installs, yet a "what's new" onboarding would be most helpful.
Further broken down by:
New things that are turned off by default, but you might want to consider turning on Things that will be turned on by default, but you might want to consider turning off New options for things that already existed, yet now have additional granularity or choices From the 4.5 release, some things that would have been nice to be guided through in this way would have been the addition of Pixabay, the configuration of the thread statistics and timeline settings, calling out the move of the anonymous login setting to within account settings, etc.

I also would love to see here an option to display these messages to all users but without mentioning the exact moderator, who performed the action.
I.e., groups with permissions will see:
%username% changed the title from "ABC" to "123" %username% moved %n% messages to the %topic% While ordinary users will see:
Moderator changed the title from "ABC" to "123" Moderator moved %n% messages to the %topic% Where %username% is the username and Moderator is just text.

I do have a small observation or small critique on this; please don't take this the wrong way but it seems like this could be a big issue moving forward and I hope my voice will be heard here. I mean NO disrespect.
---
ACP -> Community -> Forums -> Settings -> disable "Moderation events between posts"
---
I feel this option should not be an 'On' or 'Off' option, but rather a "permission set" type of item or perhaps both one to turn it on and another to allow who can see these; allowing me to chose which groups can see it. I feel this particular item is a staff only sort of item and I wish there was a way to only allow my moderators or administrators to see this; guests have no reason to see moderated modifications to posts but staff does. While this option is awesome for staff use, it seems a bit misplaced allowing a visitor to see changes that moderators do.
Please don't take this to heart, I just feel it is a change that needs to be implemented having used the product a long time, love the staff, and company, it comes from a good heart and place.

I hope not 🙁

Today @Michael.J's Auto Welcome plugin was updated with 4.5 support. As a part of the upgrade process in 4.5, an incrementing process runs to presumably move data out of a Not Good Place(tm) in the database into a place deemed acceptable by IPS Marketplace guidelines. As we have many, many members, this process was slowly incrementing, 50 at a time, toward the very large number of members that we have. This must have met the IPS standards and must have been blessed by IPS' review process.
Unfortunately, my internet connection blipped out during the upgrade, causing the process to fail, and leaving the plugin in a state where it's not fully updated, it's trying to rerun SQL queries that were already run, and there's no way to move forward. I can't download the 4.5 resource to see what it's doing, nor can I restart or pickup the upgrade process. Maybe I could uninstall and lose all data associated with it through a reinstall, but that's ... less than ideal.
What's the plan, IPS, for this sort of stuff? Who supports this? You? Michael, the third party developer? I'm out of luck? Thankfully we test rigorously before doing things in production, yet it seems that these sorts of things (moving data within the database) should be required to be developed as background processes that continue to run and aren't dependent on the administrator's internet connection. Is that not possible for plugin/application development? Are you not thinking to check for this? Did this get overlooked? Where's the developer documentation for background processes even located?
No criticism of Michael here. He's doing good work, and making a good product. IPS needs to take ownership of this nonsense by making it impossible to see these issues in advance and locking out downloads from the Marketplace. This isn't the Apple experienced we were promised. And if there's a place where Michael could have learned about how to setup background tasks in the upgrade process for a plugin or application, then I should be able to find it when I look at the developer docs.

That would be the day we'd immediately begin transitioning to another platform.

No, it's not a terrible idea on its face, and I don't think it's fair to characterize it as such. IPS is now dealing with the reality of the concerns raised during the beta. If I, as a customer, had a marketplace available to me of supported, quality products, that IPS took ownership of, controlled, and gave me assurances would be supported long term, I'd have no issue here. I'd just open up a support request, let you know that something was not working right, and IPS would help me fix it.
Now that you recognize the degree to which the items available via Marketplace are not following your best practices, I'm glad you're doing something about it. Please continue that effort. It improves the ecosystem. Yet, I think we'd be better served if you owned the shortcomings of the execution of that strategy, rather than characterizing those who alerted you to the issue in advance of having some sort of agenda. I also think you need to be in better touch and communication with your stakeholders regarding your roadmap for major changes like this and involve them in those conversations so you can get a better sense of the impact that may be difficult to see from your perspective. We could have likely had a thirty minute call that could brought to light these issues and concerns earlier on in the process and have helped guided your direction and execution. I think IPS would be well served to seek out and embrace those sorts of partnerships with customers.
Maybe that's the goal, yet the state of Marketplace in 4.4 and below was exactly the opposite, and you're now catching up. From our vantage point, the Marketplace was a hodgepodge of questionable practices, of which there was no assurance of quality, stability, or functionality. I'm glad higher degrees of scrutiny are being placed on new offerings, and that you're seeing just how that was the case, yet the purpose of my opening the topic is to ask what happens when your best of intentions fail. This is an example of where there's a clear lapse in the considerations being made by reviewers. This is an issue IPS needs to address to reach your goal. Part of the review plan should be install/upgrade/delete this on a large sized community.
We purchased your software because it was modifiable, and with the intent to modify it ourselves to suit our community's needs. We know that what is good for our community may be completely different from the needs of other customers. And to be able to create modifications, we do need the access to developer documentation and to the community of developers that is currently available only to those who contribute Marketplace resources. We purchased modifications from your Marketplace in 4.4 because we were able to see, understand, support, and take over maintenance of those resources without depending on someone else. Now that this isn't the case, and we don't yet have the necessary trust in the direction the Marketplace is shifting, we've had to quickly reverse course and strategy to making the modifications ourselves. We went from two custom modifications in 4.4 that weren't from the Marketplace to ten customizations we've developed ourselves in preparation to migrate to 4.5. In addition to taking on that technical debt, we're being limited in learning from the collaborations with others. That's not right.
For the Marketplace to work for communities like ours, we need assurances on the following things:
IPS' commitment to amend its review processes to look for issues that manifest themselves in larger communities (i.e. communities with millions of rows in each core table) and for issues that occur in the install, upgrade, and removal of third-party resources. Support for circumstances that arise from missing an issue on the IPS review of a third-party product (i.e. "We missed that this botched the conversion process in our review, so we'll provide support to you to fix the state it's in and work with the developer to get it working") Transparency in the expectations you place on developers that are viewable to individuals who have not released an item on the Marketplace (i.e. where can I learn about developing background tasks?). IPS' assurances to address the very real, and unfortunate reality of a third-party developer being no longer able to support or update a resource purchased through the black-box of a Marketplace. (i.e. We can't have a dependency of Developer X being the only one with keys to our enterprise.) IPS' commitment to notify self-hosted clients well in advance of major strategy changes such as these in the future. We would have significantly amended our budgeting and resource allocation had we known about this change to the Marketplace in advance, and you lost a great deal of the trust we put in you as a vendor by failing to do so. We're left with egg on our face making up for this lapse in the eyes of our stakeholders. We see ourselves as having a symbiotic relationship with Invision, where our respective successes help grow and support each other. We want you to succeed in these ventures as your successes enable ours. Yet we need to have a trust in our partner to ensure that our interests are protected. Doing so positions us to be advocates for your company and solutions, over simply being a client looking for the next best thing.

Some related problems:
 
 
 

Some related problems:
 
 
 

Some related problems:
 
 
 

got to admit even with all available options showing and enabled there is still a lot of white space and does not look good. needs reducing or options moving to reduce the space.  Apart from that the theme seems a lot brighter than the previous one.