Rοb

Yes this has been suggested many times before, let's hope it gets implemented! :)

How much longer for what?

There is a stable version available via the customer forums. Not "final" by any means, but certainly usable.

In addition to this I have a couple more very simple improvements that can be made:

1. Add two more options:

Allow images in signatures?
Allow images in "About Me"?

You may want to allow the member to use coloured text etc in their signature but not images.

2. If images are disabled, remove the "Insert image" button from the RTE editor.
3. If BBCode/Emoticons are disabled, do not show the RTE editor, it is confusing to members since they can't use it!

#3 might be a pre 3.0 bug, I haven't upgraded yet. If someone wants to confirm it with 3.0.2 I'll add it to the tracker.

In summary, the more options that are per-group the better. It hands more control to the administrator.

Look forward to hearing from you.

Sounds good. This can probably be achieved quite easily with a task.

Hello,

I would like to see many of the ACP "User Profiles" changed to be per user group, not globally. I believe I have requested this feature before but cannot find it to "bump".

Most items in the Global User Profile Options and Avatars & Photos sections should be per group.

As things stand it is somewhat limiting, I'd like for example to allow just my staff and VIP members to edit their member title, but currently cannot do so.

I'd like to allow only certain user groups to upload/use avatars but cannot do so. Same for BB code in signatures etc, certain groups I'd like to allow, but not others.

Quite a simple but effective suggestion really, it will be another leap towards full control for board administrators.

Edit: Having had a quick scan over the IPB3 ACP, the following I would like to see as group options.

Global User Profile Options
Avatars & Photos Guest Default Options (scrapped and contents moved to "User Profile Options")

[*]Allow users to choose skins? [*]Number of posts a member must have before allowing them to change their member title? Can change their member title? [*]Maximum length (in bytes) for user signatures [*]Allow HTML in signatures? [*]Allow BBCode in signatures?

[*]Allow the use of avatars? [*]Allow users to use remote URL avatars? [*]Max. file size for avatar uploads? (K) [*]Maximum avatar dimensions

[*]Allow members to rate each other? [*]Allow HTML in "About Me"? [*]Allow BBCode in "About Me"? [*]Allow emoticons in "About Me"? [*]Enable the friends feature? (not sure what this is exactly so will add it just in case)

I have just switched to the new skin and have to say I love it. Well done to the author!

Hello,

This is currently being looked into by IPS, wait a few days and see what they come up with.

There's a huge thread about this subject here:

Charles/Matt have said it will be looked at.

I don't think the intentions were dishonourable, so lets just wait and see what solution is put forward :)

So now your about to do an about turn and give lifetime licenses the same benefits whats the point in having a standard license that we pay every 6 months for?

Just playing devils advocate :P

You pay for your upgrades and support every 6 months. We paid in advance :P

As an active Lifetime License holder.

If I want to add the IP.Blog,IP.Gallery,IP.Downloads systems I pay a yearly fee for them (I have active blog/gallery licenses).

If I want to remove the footer copyright I make a one-off payment (currently considering).

If I want to use the new spam service... my "Lifetime License" is effectively ruled null and void?

I would happily pay a small additional fee (as I do with the other add-ons), but essentially I'm being asked to pay for another full license. Hello, I have one.

Am I missing something or is this a financially motivated drive to force Lifetime License holders into regular payments.

I also have a lifetime license. Does this mean that if I wanted to use this new spam service it is effectively null and void?

To be fair I really haven't read much on this so please excuse me if I am missing something.

Edit: Looks that way, just had a mini read through.

I agree with Wolfie, a (smaller) yearly payment would be the way forward.

I felt like smacking someone when I saw this thread's title.

You have the honour of receiving my first ever rep point, I felt exactly the same way.

Eye can tell.

That's pretty much what Mark has been saying above (especially with his last post), although not with those exact words.

No, what Mark has been saying is that IPS have/had many customers lodge support tickets regarding the feature and as a result of which it has been changed (for the better I might add).

He has also said that you can easily revert it back to the old functionality should you wish, and has even offered to do it for you.

What else would you like, your feet rubbed whilst he does it?

Changing how the Sign Out works is a bit extreme IMO, it is easy enough to just put some extra padding around those links if you feel they are too close together.

Very simple yet handy suggestion, I have seen it before (possibly even suggested it myself), and am surprised it hasn't found its way into 3.0:

Have all IP's link to the "IP Address Look-up Tool" section, not just those in topic view. Online list, PM's etc.

Edit. Just checked 3.0 Final and IP's aren't even showing in my PM's?

Anyhow, just an easy, small improvement that can be made :)

It isn't finished/released yet, keep an eye out for an announcement :)

I have decided that my mid-year resolution is to not let these threads irritate me any more, life is too short :P

[/off-topic]

Sigh, another "when will it be released" thread...

Apparently for each one created it brings that magical date forward an hour.

Seriously though, the answer is "when it is ready". IPS never have public release dates :)

Wouldn't matter. That's backend processing time

.. which is passed to the front-end user lol.

I've not noticed any difference in speed whatsoever (all versions of IP.Board 3.0 installed on these boards), all appears fine to me.

Could be browser specific though, I use Chrome which is uber-fast.

Although given that the Shoutbox and Tracker have never been shipped with IP.Board, I have a feeling the Subscription Manager is likely to gain somewhat more attention/focus/importance ;)

The encoding is not an issue as we use unencoded builds of IPB anyway (thats how Shoutbox and Tracker are being ported). I know its a big feature, but I am kind of glad we do not have it as a community project yet, we have enough on our plates :P

Ah OK, wasn't sure if it was an issue or not (the encoding) :)

Off the topic slightly but I'm hoping that this will become a community project sooner rather than later (i.e perhaps with the first un-encoded release) as this module is one of the main reasons I use IP.Board.