Chris Anderson

Although there are lots of settings and features built into the suite to programmatically encourage "connectivity", it takes a great deal of finesse to keep both the early adopters and those that join later "truly" connected.
If a site admin "wings it", then...

It will likely lead to a "very" bumpy ride for one-and-all.
It takes thought and experimentation to hit upon how to create an overall environment that encourages members to connect with each other at the various stages of a site's development and long-term existence.
Eliciting feedback from early adopters is important but there is no guarantee that the first cohort's personality and interests will mirror that of future members. As such, it's wise not to build-out a site utilizing their input exclusively.   One should continuously elicit input from folks that have been around for varying periods of time. When you get a handle of the needs of your overall membership new and old you will have a better sense of how to guide the community towards ever more connectivity around areas that matter to the group as a whole.
As people's interests change (and you factor in short-lived trends) a site needs to constantly figure out how to address those changing interests and possibly differences in how members engage with each other. This is especially important if a site caters to a demographic that encompasses multiple generations and geographic regions.
Adopting a top-down approach to community engagement is unlikely to work much past a site's launch. A site admin should refrain from thinking this is "my site" and instead of think of it as "our site". What should "we" do to make this site far more engaging for all of us in comparison with our competitors?  Does "our" content "engage" and "inform", and does it feel like a place to hang out and make "real" connections with others.
Instead of admins setting the tone for a site by ensuring members adhere to a complex set of community standards one might consider changing their roles to be facilitators. They could be utilized to facilitate great dialog and introduce various members to each other they think might benefit from getting to know each other and elicit great conversations.
Getting to know other members in meaningful ways may require revealing a little more about oneself than just one's screen name. Profiles with just the right kind of fields filled out can go a long way towards helping ferret out fellow members with similar interests. This is a feature that often isn't utilized to its fullest extent as the value proposition isn't properly communicated to one-and-all from my observations of this site as well as others.
I've had 12,719 profile views here but as very few other people have filled out their profiles, I've followed suite and left mine almost blank.  People appear to want to know more about other fellow members here, but IPS has chosen not to promote the use of profiles.
Being in regular contact with your entire community (not just your early adopters and power users) is important. This will better allow you to find common ground amongst your entire membership. You might have to make a special effort to draw some folks out but it's worth it in the long term.  Many new members are a bit shy at first but in time may become quite active when they reach a certain comfort level. Who knows, some of these folks might be some of your best contributors in the years to come.
Society seems to instill a strong sense of independence in the populace.  Although that has many positives there are negative aspects as well.  One being that we are often reticent of asking for help from others.
Collectively we can accomplish so much more than what we can do individually, so don't be afraid to ask for assistance from your membership to help create a "community". You might be surprised by how many folks will offer to lend a hand if it is being used in a truly useful fashion and a task can be completed in a short span of time.
@Matt made some great points above, I would recommend folks check out more of his blog postings along with Joel R and Jordan Miller.
 
 

Although there are lots of settings and features built into the suite to programmatically encourage "connectivity", it takes a great deal of finesse to keep both the early adopters and those that join later "truly" connected.
If a site admin "wings it", then...

It will likely lead to a "very" bumpy ride for one-and-all.
It takes thought and experimentation to hit upon how to create an overall environment that encourages members to connect with each other at the various stages of a site's development and long-term existence.
Eliciting feedback from early adopters is important but there is no guarantee that the first cohort's personality and interests will mirror that of future members. As such, it's wise not to build-out a site utilizing their input exclusively.   One should continuously elicit input from folks that have been around for varying periods of time. When you get a handle of the needs of your overall membership new and old you will have a better sense of how to guide the community towards ever more connectivity around areas that matter to the group as a whole.
As people's interests change (and you factor in short-lived trends) a site needs to constantly figure out how to address those changing interests and possibly differences in how members engage with each other. This is especially important if a site caters to a demographic that encompasses multiple generations and geographic regions.
Adopting a top-down approach to community engagement is unlikely to work much past a site's launch. A site admin should refrain from thinking this is "my site" and instead of think of it as "our site". What should "we" do to make this site far more engaging for all of us in comparison with our competitors?  Does "our" content "engage" and "inform", and does it feel like a place to hang out and make "real" connections with others.
Instead of admins setting the tone for a site by ensuring members adhere to a complex set of community standards one might consider changing their roles to be facilitators. They could be utilized to facilitate great dialog and introduce various members to each other they think might benefit from getting to know each other and elicit great conversations.
Getting to know other members in meaningful ways may require revealing a little more about oneself than just one's screen name. Profiles with just the right kind of fields filled out can go a long way towards helping ferret out fellow members with similar interests. This is a feature that often isn't utilized to its fullest extent as the value proposition isn't properly communicated to one-and-all from my observations of this site as well as others.
I've had 12,719 profile views here but as very few other people have filled out their profiles, I've followed suite and left mine almost blank.  People appear to want to know more about other fellow members here, but IPS has chosen not to promote the use of profiles.
Being in regular contact with your entire community (not just your early adopters and power users) is important. This will better allow you to find common ground amongst your entire membership. You might have to make a special effort to draw some folks out but it's worth it in the long term.  Many new members are a bit shy at first but in time may become quite active when they reach a certain comfort level. Who knows, some of these folks might be some of your best contributors in the years to come.
Society seems to instill a strong sense of independence in the populace.  Although that has many positives there are negative aspects as well.  One being that we are often reticent of asking for help from others.
Collectively we can accomplish so much more than what we can do individually, so don't be afraid to ask for assistance from your membership to help create a "community". You might be surprised by how many folks will offer to lend a hand if it is being used in a truly useful fashion and a task can be completed in a short span of time.
@Matt made some great points above, I would recommend folks check out more of his blog postings along with Joel R and Jordan Miller.
 
 

Although there are lots of settings and features built into the suite to programmatically encourage "connectivity", it takes a great deal of finesse to keep both the early adopters and those that join later "truly" connected.
If a site admin "wings it", then...

It will likely lead to a "very" bumpy ride for one-and-all.
It takes thought and experimentation to hit upon how to create an overall environment that encourages members to connect with each other at the various stages of a site's development and long-term existence.
Eliciting feedback from early adopters is important but there is no guarantee that the first cohort's personality and interests will mirror that of future members. As such, it's wise not to build-out a site utilizing their input exclusively.   One should continuously elicit input from folks that have been around for varying periods of time. When you get a handle of the needs of your overall membership new and old you will have a better sense of how to guide the community towards ever more connectivity around areas that matter to the group as a whole.
As people's interests change (and you factor in short-lived trends) a site needs to constantly figure out how to address those changing interests and possibly differences in how members engage with each other. This is especially important if a site caters to a demographic that encompasses multiple generations and geographic regions.
Adopting a top-down approach to community engagement is unlikely to work much past a site's launch. A site admin should refrain from thinking this is "my site" and instead of think of it as "our site". What should "we" do to make this site far more engaging for all of us in comparison with our competitors?  Does "our" content "engage" and "inform", and does it feel like a place to hang out and make "real" connections with others.
Instead of admins setting the tone for a site by ensuring members adhere to a complex set of community standards one might consider changing their roles to be facilitators. They could be utilized to facilitate great dialog and introduce various members to each other they think might benefit from getting to know each other and elicit great conversations.
Getting to know other members in meaningful ways may require revealing a little more about oneself than just one's screen name. Profiles with just the right kind of fields filled out can go a long way towards helping ferret out fellow members with similar interests. This is a feature that often isn't utilized to its fullest extent as the value proposition isn't properly communicated to one-and-all from my observations of this site as well as others.
I've had 12,719 profile views here but as very few other people have filled out their profiles, I've followed suite and left mine almost blank.  People appear to want to know more about other fellow members here, but IPS has chosen not to promote the use of profiles.
Being in regular contact with your entire community (not just your early adopters and power users) is important. This will better allow you to find common ground amongst your entire membership. You might have to make a special effort to draw some folks out but it's worth it in the long term.  Many new members are a bit shy at first but in time may become quite active when they reach a certain comfort level. Who knows, some of these folks might be some of your best contributors in the years to come.
Society seems to instill a strong sense of independence in the populace.  Although that has many positives there are negative aspects as well.  One being that we are often reticent of asking for help from others.
Collectively we can accomplish so much more than what we can do individually, so don't be afraid to ask for assistance from your membership to help create a "community". You might be surprised by how many folks will offer to lend a hand if it is being used in a truly useful fashion and a task can be completed in a short span of time.
@Matt made some great points above, I would recommend folks check out more of his blog postings along with Joel R and Jordan Miller.
 
 

Although there are lots of settings and features built into the suite to programmatically encourage "connectivity", it takes a great deal of finesse to keep both the early adopters and those that join later "truly" connected.
If a site admin "wings it", then...

It will likely lead to a "very" bumpy ride for one-and-all.
It takes thought and experimentation to hit upon how to create an overall environment that encourages members to connect with each other at the various stages of a site's development and long-term existence.
Eliciting feedback from early adopters is important but there is no guarantee that the first cohort's personality and interests will mirror that of future members. As such, it's wise not to build-out a site utilizing their input exclusively.   One should continuously elicit input from folks that have been around for varying periods of time. When you get a handle of the needs of your overall membership new and old you will have a better sense of how to guide the community towards ever more connectivity around areas that matter to the group as a whole.
As people's interests change (and you factor in short-lived trends) a site needs to constantly figure out how to address those changing interests and possibly differences in how members engage with each other. This is especially important if a site caters to a demographic that encompasses multiple generations and geographic regions.
Adopting a top-down approach to community engagement is unlikely to work much past a site's launch. A site admin should refrain from thinking this is "my site" and instead of think of it as "our site". What should "we" do to make this site far more engaging for all of us in comparison with our competitors?  Does "our" content "engage" and "inform", and does it feel like a place to hang out and make "real" connections with others.
Instead of admins setting the tone for a site by ensuring members adhere to a complex set of community standards one might consider changing their roles to be facilitators. They could be utilized to facilitate great dialog and introduce various members to each other they think might benefit from getting to know each other and elicit great conversations.
Getting to know other members in meaningful ways may require revealing a little more about oneself than just one's screen name. Profiles with just the right kind of fields filled out can go a long way towards helping ferret out fellow members with similar interests. This is a feature that often isn't utilized to its fullest extent as the value proposition isn't properly communicated to one-and-all from my observations of this site as well as others.
I've had 12,719 profile views here but as very few other people have filled out their profiles, I've followed suite and left mine almost blank.  People appear to want to know more about other fellow members here, but IPS has chosen not to promote the use of profiles.
Being in regular contact with your entire community (not just your early adopters and power users) is important. This will better allow you to find common ground amongst your entire membership. You might have to make a special effort to draw some folks out but it's worth it in the long term.  Many new members are a bit shy at first but in time may become quite active when they reach a certain comfort level. Who knows, some of these folks might be some of your best contributors in the years to come.
Society seems to instill a strong sense of independence in the populace.  Although that has many positives there are negative aspects as well.  One being that we are often reticent of asking for help from others.
Collectively we can accomplish so much more than what we can do individually, so don't be afraid to ask for assistance from your membership to help create a "community". You might be surprised by how many folks will offer to lend a hand if it is being used in a truly useful fashion and a task can be completed in a short span of time.
@Matt made some great points above, I would recommend folks check out more of his blog postings along with Joel R and Jordan Miller.
 
 

Although there are lots of settings and features built into the suite to programmatically encourage "connectivity", it takes a great deal of finesse to keep both the early adopters and those that join later "truly" connected.
If a site admin "wings it", then...

It will likely lead to a "very" bumpy ride for one-and-all.
It takes thought and experimentation to hit upon how to create an overall environment that encourages members to connect with each other at the various stages of a site's development and long-term existence.
Eliciting feedback from early adopters is important but there is no guarantee that the first cohort's personality and interests will mirror that of future members. As such, it's wise not to build-out a site utilizing their input exclusively.   One should continuously elicit input from folks that have been around for varying periods of time. When you get a handle of the needs of your overall membership new and old you will have a better sense of how to guide the community towards ever more connectivity around areas that matter to the group as a whole.
As people's interests change (and you factor in short-lived trends) a site needs to constantly figure out how to address those changing interests and possibly differences in how members engage with each other. This is especially important if a site caters to a demographic that encompasses multiple generations and geographic regions.
Adopting a top-down approach to community engagement is unlikely to work much past a site's launch. A site admin should refrain from thinking this is "my site" and instead of think of it as "our site". What should "we" do to make this site far more engaging for all of us in comparison with our competitors?  Does "our" content "engage" and "inform", and does it feel like a place to hang out and make "real" connections with others.
Instead of admins setting the tone for a site by ensuring members adhere to a complex set of community standards one might consider changing their roles to be facilitators. They could be utilized to facilitate great dialog and introduce various members to each other they think might benefit from getting to know each other and elicit great conversations.
Getting to know other members in meaningful ways may require revealing a little more about oneself than just one's screen name. Profiles with just the right kind of fields filled out can go a long way towards helping ferret out fellow members with similar interests. This is a feature that often isn't utilized to its fullest extent as the value proposition isn't properly communicated to one-and-all from my observations of this site as well as others.
I've had 12,719 profile views here but as very few other people have filled out their profiles, I've followed suite and left mine almost blank.  People appear to want to know more about other fellow members here, but IPS has chosen not to promote the use of profiles.
Being in regular contact with your entire community (not just your early adopters and power users) is important. This will better allow you to find common ground amongst your entire membership. You might have to make a special effort to draw some folks out but it's worth it in the long term.  Many new members are a bit shy at first but in time may become quite active when they reach a certain comfort level. Who knows, some of these folks might be some of your best contributors in the years to come.
Society seems to instill a strong sense of independence in the populace.  Although that has many positives there are negative aspects as well.  One being that we are often reticent of asking for help from others.
Collectively we can accomplish so much more than what we can do individually, so don't be afraid to ask for assistance from your membership to help create a "community". You might be surprised by how many folks will offer to lend a hand if it is being used in a truly useful fashion and a task can be completed in a short span of time.
@Matt made some great points above, I would recommend folks check out more of his blog postings along with Joel R and Jordan Miller.
 
 

Although there are lots of settings and features built into the suite to programmatically encourage "connectivity", it takes a great deal of finesse to keep both the early adopters and those that join later "truly" connected.
If a site admin "wings it", then...

It will likely lead to a "very" bumpy ride for one-and-all.
It takes thought and experimentation to hit upon how to create an overall environment that encourages members to connect with each other at the various stages of a site's development and long-term existence.
Eliciting feedback from early adopters is important but there is no guarantee that the first cohort's personality and interests will mirror that of future members. As such, it's wise not to build-out a site utilizing their input exclusively.   One should continuously elicit input from folks that have been around for varying periods of time. When you get a handle of the needs of your overall membership new and old you will have a better sense of how to guide the community towards ever more connectivity around areas that matter to the group as a whole.
As people's interests change (and you factor in short-lived trends) a site needs to constantly figure out how to address those changing interests and possibly differences in how members engage with each other. This is especially important if a site caters to a demographic that encompasses multiple generations and geographic regions.
Adopting a top-down approach to community engagement is unlikely to work much past a site's launch. A site admin should refrain from thinking this is "my site" and instead of think of it as "our site". What should "we" do to make this site far more engaging for all of us in comparison with our competitors?  Does "our" content "engage" and "inform", and does it feel like a place to hang out and make "real" connections with others.
Instead of admins setting the tone for a site by ensuring members adhere to a complex set of community standards one might consider changing their roles to be facilitators. They could be utilized to facilitate great dialog and introduce various members to each other they think might benefit from getting to know each other and elicit great conversations.
Getting to know other members in meaningful ways may require revealing a little more about oneself than just one's screen name. Profiles with just the right kind of fields filled out can go a long way towards helping ferret out fellow members with similar interests. This is a feature that often isn't utilized to its fullest extent as the value proposition isn't properly communicated to one-and-all from my observations of this site as well as others.
I've had 12,719 profile views here but as very few other people have filled out their profiles, I've followed suite and left mine almost blank.  People appear to want to know more about other fellow members here, but IPS has chosen not to promote the use of profiles.
Being in regular contact with your entire community (not just your early adopters and power users) is important. This will better allow you to find common ground amongst your entire membership. You might have to make a special effort to draw some folks out but it's worth it in the long term.  Many new members are a bit shy at first but in time may become quite active when they reach a certain comfort level. Who knows, some of these folks might be some of your best contributors in the years to come.
Society seems to instill a strong sense of independence in the populace.  Although that has many positives there are negative aspects as well.  One being that we are often reticent of asking for help from others.
Collectively we can accomplish so much more than what we can do individually, so don't be afraid to ask for assistance from your membership to help create a "community". You might be surprised by how many folks will offer to lend a hand if it is being used in a truly useful fashion and a task can be completed in a short span of time.
@Matt made some great points above, I would recommend folks check out more of his blog postings along with Joel R and Jordan Miller.
 
 

Although there are lots of settings and features built into the suite to programmatically encourage "connectivity", it takes a great deal of finesse to keep both the early adopters and those that join later "truly" connected.
If a site admin "wings it", then...

It will likely lead to a "very" bumpy ride for one-and-all.
It takes thought and experimentation to hit upon how to create an overall environment that encourages members to connect with each other at the various stages of a site's development and long-term existence.
Eliciting feedback from early adopters is important but there is no guarantee that the first cohort's personality and interests will mirror that of future members. As such, it's wise not to build-out a site utilizing their input exclusively.   One should continuously elicit input from folks that have been around for varying periods of time. When you get a handle of the needs of your overall membership new and old you will have a better sense of how to guide the community towards ever more connectivity around areas that matter to the group as a whole.
As people's interests change (and you factor in short-lived trends) a site needs to constantly figure out how to address those changing interests and possibly differences in how members engage with each other. This is especially important if a site caters to a demographic that encompasses multiple generations and geographic regions.
Adopting a top-down approach to community engagement is unlikely to work much past a site's launch. A site admin should refrain from thinking this is "my site" and instead of think of it as "our site". What should "we" do to make this site far more engaging for all of us in comparison with our competitors?  Does "our" content "engage" and "inform", and does it feel like a place to hang out and make "real" connections with others.
Instead of admins setting the tone for a site by ensuring members adhere to a complex set of community standards one might consider changing their roles to be facilitators. They could be utilized to facilitate great dialog and introduce various members to each other they think might benefit from getting to know each other and elicit great conversations.
Getting to know other members in meaningful ways may require revealing a little more about oneself than just one's screen name. Profiles with just the right kind of fields filled out can go a long way towards helping ferret out fellow members with similar interests. This is a feature that often isn't utilized to its fullest extent as the value proposition isn't properly communicated to one-and-all from my observations of this site as well as others.
I've had 12,719 profile views here but as very few other people have filled out their profiles, I've followed suite and left mine almost blank.  People appear to want to know more about other fellow members here, but IPS has chosen not to promote the use of profiles.
Being in regular contact with your entire community (not just your early adopters and power users) is important. This will better allow you to find common ground amongst your entire membership. You might have to make a special effort to draw some folks out but it's worth it in the long term.  Many new members are a bit shy at first but in time may become quite active when they reach a certain comfort level. Who knows, some of these folks might be some of your best contributors in the years to come.
Society seems to instill a strong sense of independence in the populace.  Although that has many positives there are negative aspects as well.  One being that we are often reticent of asking for help from others.
Collectively we can accomplish so much more than what we can do individually, so don't be afraid to ask for assistance from your membership to help create a "community". You might be surprised by how many folks will offer to lend a hand if it is being used in a truly useful fashion and a task can be completed in a short span of time.
@Matt made some great points above, I would recommend folks check out more of his blog postings along with Joel R and Jordan Miller.
 
 

Although there are lots of settings and features built into the suite to programmatically encourage "connectivity", it takes a great deal of finesse to keep both the early adopters and those that join later "truly" connected.
If a site admin "wings it", then...

It will likely lead to a "very" bumpy ride for one-and-all.
It takes thought and experimentation to hit upon how to create an overall environment that encourages members to connect with each other at the various stages of a site's development and long-term existence.
Eliciting feedback from early adopters is important but there is no guarantee that the first cohort's personality and interests will mirror that of future members. As such, it's wise not to build-out a site utilizing their input exclusively.   One should continuously elicit input from folks that have been around for varying periods of time. When you get a handle of the needs of your overall membership new and old you will have a better sense of how to guide the community towards ever more connectivity around areas that matter to the group as a whole.
As people's interests change (and you factor in short-lived trends) a site needs to constantly figure out how to address those changing interests and possibly differences in how members engage with each other. This is especially important if a site caters to a demographic that encompasses multiple generations and geographic regions.
Adopting a top-down approach to community engagement is unlikely to work much past a site's launch. A site admin should refrain from thinking this is "my site" and instead of think of it as "our site". What should "we" do to make this site far more engaging for all of us in comparison with our competitors?  Does "our" content "engage" and "inform", and does it feel like a place to hang out and make "real" connections with others.
Instead of admins setting the tone for a site by ensuring members adhere to a complex set of community standards one might consider changing their roles to be facilitators. They could be utilized to facilitate great dialog and introduce various members to each other they think might benefit from getting to know each other and elicit great conversations.
Getting to know other members in meaningful ways may require revealing a little more about oneself than just one's screen name. Profiles with just the right kind of fields filled out can go a long way towards helping ferret out fellow members with similar interests. This is a feature that often isn't utilized to its fullest extent as the value proposition isn't properly communicated to one-and-all from my observations of this site as well as others.
I've had 12,719 profile views here but as very few other people have filled out their profiles, I've followed suite and left mine almost blank.  People appear to want to know more about other fellow members here, but IPS has chosen not to promote the use of profiles.
Being in regular contact with your entire community (not just your early adopters and power users) is important. This will better allow you to find common ground amongst your entire membership. You might have to make a special effort to draw some folks out but it's worth it in the long term.  Many new members are a bit shy at first but in time may become quite active when they reach a certain comfort level. Who knows, some of these folks might be some of your best contributors in the years to come.
Society seems to instill a strong sense of independence in the populace.  Although that has many positives there are negative aspects as well.  One being that we are often reticent of asking for help from others.
Collectively we can accomplish so much more than what we can do individually, so don't be afraid to ask for assistance from your membership to help create a "community". You might be surprised by how many folks will offer to lend a hand if it is being used in a truly useful fashion and a task can be completed in a short span of time.
@Matt made some great points above, I would recommend folks check out more of his blog postings along with Joel R and Jordan Miller.
 
 

All jokes aside, stock replies could be used as a means of bringing structure and consistency to a group of moderators and admins.  Some sites might stick to the exact wording that has been decided upon for various stock replies and other sites might randomly replace some of the sentences with alternative versions to mix things up so the replies don't seem so impersonal and formulaic. For VIP members a site might decide to forgo using stock replies entirely and truly personalize each and every communication. 

As the functionality stands now you get a running list of Stock Replies that you have to scroll through to "hopefully find one that is appropriate for the area you are in currently.

It would be nice if IPS created categories that you populate in the ACP and then choose on the front end to find a set of Stock Replies pertinent to a particular use case.

 
Once you click on a category it would bring up a list of relevant Stock Replies you could choose from.
Access to each category would be set in the ACP and would only appear on the frontend if the user had the appropriate permission.   
 

As the functionality stands now you get a running list of Stock Replies that you have to scroll through to "hopefully find one that is appropriate for the area you are in currently.

It would be nice if IPS created categories that you populate in the ACP and then choose on the front end to find a set of Stock Replies pertinent to a particular use case.

 
Once you click on a category it would bring up a list of relevant Stock Replies you could choose from.
Access to each category would be set in the ACP and would only appear on the frontend if the user had the appropriate permission.   
 

As the functionality stands now you get a running list of Stock Replies that you have to scroll through to "hopefully find one that is appropriate for the area you are in currently.

It would be nice if IPS created categories that you populate in the ACP and then choose on the front end to find a set of Stock Replies pertinent to a particular use case.

 
Once you click on a category it would bring up a list of relevant Stock Replies you could choose from.
Access to each category would be set in the ACP and would only appear on the frontend if the user had the appropriate permission.   
 

As the functionality stands now you get a running list of Stock Replies that you have to scroll through to "hopefully find one that is appropriate for the area you are in currently.

It would be nice if IPS created categories that you populate in the ACP and then choose on the front end to find a set of Stock Replies pertinent to a particular use case.

 
Once you click on a category it would bring up a list of relevant Stock Replies you could choose from.
Access to each category would be set in the ACP and would only appear on the frontend if the user had the appropriate permission.   
 

As the functionality stands now you get a running list of Stock Replies that you have to scroll through to "hopefully find one that is appropriate for the area you are in currently.

It would be nice if IPS created categories that you populate in the ACP and then choose on the front end to find a set of Stock Replies pertinent to a particular use case.

 
Once you click on a category it would bring up a list of relevant Stock Replies you could choose from.
Access to each category would be set in the ACP and would only appear on the frontend if the user had the appropriate permission.   
 

To enable the use of stock replies you are prompted through a series of configuration steps.  The first step being to add a button to the small, medium and large toolbars.  I'm stuck on this step as I don't see a button that jumps out at me as being the one to choose. What seems obvious to IPS developers and even you my fine friend aren't always obvious to me.

Could someone please provide a clue as to where to find the button to add to the editor.  I hovered over each of the buttons not on the editor and none of them seemed to be a match.

Put the following in your constants.php file (or create one).
<?php
\define('USE_DEVELOPMENT_BUILDS','TRUE');
Navigate to "Applications" in your ACP and click on "Check for Updates".
You should see a banner show up alerting you of the existence of beta releases.  You can upgrade your board (or not) as you wish.  To remove prompting for betas you simply replace "TRUE" with "FALSE" or delete that line from your constants.php file.
As with any release please do a complete backup of your site as there is a possibility that the upgrade will encounter an issue. If you do encounter an issue you can always restore from backup and wait for the next beta or full release.  

As the functionality stands now you get a running list of Stock Replies that you have to scroll through to "hopefully find one that is appropriate for the area you are in currently.

It would be nice if IPS created categories that you populate in the ACP and then choose on the front end to find a set of Stock Replies pertinent to a particular use case.

 
Once you click on a category it would bring up a list of relevant Stock Replies you could choose from.
Access to each category would be set in the ACP and would only appear on the frontend if the user had the appropriate permission.   
 

As the functionality stands now you get a running list of Stock Replies that you have to scroll through to "hopefully find one that is appropriate for the area you are in currently.

It would be nice if IPS created categories that you populate in the ACP and then choose on the front end to find a set of Stock Replies pertinent to a particular use case.

 
Once you click on a category it would bring up a list of relevant Stock Replies you could choose from.
Access to each category would be set in the ACP and would only appear on the frontend if the user had the appropriate permission.   
 

As the functionality stands now you get a running list of Stock Replies that you have to scroll through to "hopefully find one that is appropriate for the area you are in currently.

It would be nice if IPS created categories that you populate in the ACP and then choose on the front end to find a set of Stock Replies pertinent to a particular use case.

 
Once you click on a category it would bring up a list of relevant Stock Replies you could choose from.
Access to each category would be set in the ACP and would only appear on the frontend if the user had the appropriate permission.   
 

Just tested and it is like I said: the button STOCK REPLIES will only appear after you add at least one stock reply:

 
 

 

Put the following in your constants.php file (or create one).
<?php
\define('USE_DEVELOPMENT_BUILDS','TRUE');
Navigate to "Applications" in your ACP and click on "Check for Updates".
You should see a banner show up alerting you of the existence of beta releases.  You can upgrade your board (or not) as you wish.  To remove prompting for betas you simply replace "TRUE" with "FALSE" or delete that line from your constants.php file.
As with any release please do a complete backup of your site as there is a possibility that the upgrade will encounter an issue. If you do encounter an issue you can always restore from backup and wait for the next beta or full release.  

Theme Differences - Invision Community

Adding an new entry under Applications for "Achievements" would provide consistency and allow a member to toggle between "Disabled" and "Enabled".  Disabled should be the default setting to allow an admin to decide when they are ready to implement Achievements for their site.  Many site owners will choose to spend months planning, waiting on graphic designers to create a personalized set of badges or wait for Achievements to mature to a point that it fully meets their needs. 

I will leave it up to you to read through the release notes and various topics scattered about in regards to this release.  As there will likely be several 4.6.x builds there are always the chance that the next several releases will require software fixes or code be changed as a consequence of customer feedback.