Jump to content
You're invited! Join our 4.6 Live Event on ZOOM 6/24 ×


The Heff

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


 Content Type 



IPS4 Providers

Release Notes

IPS4 Guides

IPS4 Developer Documentation

Invision Community Blog



Posts posted by The Heff

  1. It's a real shame because it used to be possible, but became difficult since renewal dates were all aligned. (Prior to that there may have been a different renewal date for gallery to the one for forums, which was confusing but was more flexible.)

    Support have removed unused purchases for me in the past, to reduce the renewal cost for an existing license, but it meant I lost that purchase forever despite having paid for it. (I could not add it back on later.)

    As a point of feedback for IPS, this led to me feature locking my community. I would previously have been willing to entertain a purchase of an application to test its use in my community, knowing that I could turn it off if not successful to save some money, and then back on again if there was a new demand for it, but I now won't entertain such ideas because paying a renewal fee for unused functionality or losing the purchase permanently if it's not required just isn't viable (it's essentially throwing away money).

  2. Just now, Dean_

    What I didn’t understand is with the discontinuation of chat why couldn’t it be changed to self host it? Then make it so the chat is deleted after x amount of days. You would’ve kept your add on fee that you charged and people would be happy. 😎

    IPS would then be required to continue supporting it and maintaining it. I can only imagine how many chat rooms would be installed on shared or inadequate hosting, resulting in performance problems and then, subsequently, support tickets.

  3. 6 hours ago, ahc said:

    With every change comes possible issues, I completely agree with that sentiment, but I don't think fearing hypotheticals should be the only strategy to approach this.  IPS is indeed a community software, but not everyone uses it in the same way.  What's true for one person is untrue for the next.  Forums themselves aren't even included in the core package, it's an add-on. 

    Oh I'm not suggesting that my examples should be blockers, but in providing them I'm trying to help the debate flow in a more productive direction - such as possible solutions to the examples I posted or confirming that completely different use cases could be applied.

    I for one would like a block feature, but my use case is one of privacy.  I don't care if content can be seen, but I would like the ability for users to block messages from, and disable access to view their profile for, specific individuals in a single button-click.

  4. Instead of debating whether the 'ignore' function works properly, just provide feedback on what you want to be able to do. You do not need to give it a name, you simply need to state your use case(s).

    There may be problems with creating a true "block" feature for community software like IPS. If you check blocking capabilities on sites where it already exists (I'm specifically thinking about social media) it serves as more of a privacy tool. It prevents others from being able to see your profile content, send you messages or view your posts. That's fine in a system where your content is entirely your own and the only impact is one less viewer of your content, but in community software like IPS this could create problems:

    1. There will be apparent gaps in conversations to users that have been blocked, for example:
      • Blocked
        • Person 1: Does anybody know how to install this program?
        • Person 2: Yes, you install it by double clicking on it.
        • Person 1: But then I get a warning about it being suspicious.
        • Person 2: That's OK, you just need to add it as an exception.
        • Person 1: Thanks
      • Unblocked
        • Person 1: Does anybody know how to install this program?
        • Person 2: Yes, you install it by double clicking on it.
        • Person 1: But then I get a warning about it being suspicious.
        • Person 2: That's OK, you just need to add it as an exception.
        • Person 3: No, don't do that! It's actually infected and a new version needs to be uploaded! Delete it and run a virus scan.
        • Person 1: Thank
    2. There will be useful topics that might not be seen:
      • Blocked
        • How to install this program.
        • How to open the program.
        • How to uninstall the program.
      • Unblocked
        • Warning: current version infected - uninstall it and run a virus scan.
        • How to install this program.
        • How to open the program.
        • How to uninstall the program.

    These are of course just examples I can think of, but I imagine there'd be gaps all over the place.

  5. I'm curious how you'd see this working on IPS. I imagine it could be a complex innovation depending on how you'd envision handling replies between users who are responding to each other rather than the first post.

    Facebook comments are sorted by the most relevant or newest, but they aren't a conversation as such. They are usually a direct response to the original content rather than a conversation between the users. Conversations between users typically take place in response to a single comment and are grouped under said comment. In the below image there are four comments that are a response to the post which are completely unrelated to each other. There are, however, replies to one of those comments where a conversation has begun:


  6. In my case, I noticed the PayPal errors before the patch was available. I ran the support tool to no avail. This means, of course, that having already run the support tool I wouldn't go and run it again, so the patches remained an unknown. My timing meant that I literally missed them.

    I'm hoping the calls in this thread result in something more proactive, even if we have to opt in to it.

  7. 7 hours ago, All Astronauts said:

    These patches are almost always super minor edge-case stuff;

    That depends entirely on the admin's own situation - what is trivial for one admin may not be for another. The point is, some of us want to know when patches are released... We want to be bothered. 🙂 

  8. On 12/7/2019 at 6:00 PM, Ramsesx said:

    you could combine this with the 'USE_DEVELOPMENT_BUILDS' constants because this mostly will be used by experienced forum owners.

    I like that idea of a constant, but not that one. I don't habitually use development builds but I do want to know about patches. Good idea though. 👍

  9. Merry Christmas IPS team! 🎅🤶🎄

    I have some feedback on the user of forum specific rules to improve the display of them, particularly in ensuring that users posting in forums are aware of forum-specific rules.

    I use a set of rules for our sales area of our community. It is a dedicated forum space for our users to advertise their property for sale to others. In doing so, we expect them to abide by a set of rules:


    As you can see, these are clearly displayed as soon as a user enters the specific forum. These are set in the ACP in the area specifically provided for this purpose:


    If a user follows a fairly traditional workflow, by navigating to the specific forum to create a new post, the rules are seen. However, we now have a different workflow available to users where this will not be the case. There is, on the forum index, a 'Start new topic' button:


    Clicking this button requires you to select a forum to create the new topic in:


    A user's workflow may instead therefore be to:

    1. visit the index;
    2. click on the 'Start new topic' button; and
    3. select a forum to post this in.

    When this workflow is followed, the user in question never sees the forum-specific rules. They are taken to the editor on which the forum specific rules are not displayed:


    This means that, in the event of a dispute, the user can validly claim to have been unaware of any specific rules they may have breached.

    Although this can be remedied on a case-by-case basis through tactful moderation, it would be better and more efficient to simply ensure the forum specific rules are visible to users using this workflow to create new topics.

    Thanks for reading. 🙂

  10. 19 hours ago, bfarber said:

    Those who are affected are encouraged to run the support tool, and if their issue is not resolved, submit a support ticket.

    The issue is that we may not know we're affected until something goes wrong, which could result in a lost registration, loss of content, loss of revenue, etc.

    I'd certainly advocate a more proactive approach to patching since I want to know if there is a possibility that an issue affects my community, rather than find out later when it could be too late. Even if it's just a banner or email notification, that'd be much better.

  11. Just now, opentype
    2 minutes ago, The Heff said:

    If I’m to be totally honest, I’d prefer this be done through the editor. The whole point of a WYSIWYG editor is to be able to see how it’ll look when posted, not for it to be displayed differently to how it was composed.

    This assumes it would show differently in the editor, which is not necessarily the case. The CSS could apply there as well. 

    I hadn’t considered that. 👍🏻

  • 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