Canis

Many thanks for commenting on feedback Matt. That can be avoided by having a "regret" period in which the profile can be recreated. Like Facebook an many other services. We cannot refuse a members request to be deleted so as it's working now it's just an unnecessary workload on the administrators and less privacy for the members.

Like for a Facebook group. With an optional message to the leaving member that existing posts, with or without username, will be kept.

No response equals that you are not planning to solve this issue?

I have, but no comment from IPS. How can you have a closed tag system that, after it has been set up, cannot be extended alphabetically? It has been like this since 4.0 was released 12 years ago.

Thanks. I did that, but as last time I got: Your support email was not received. Thank you for contacting Invision Community! As a self hosting customer, we offer support via our staffed community support forums. Please post your support needs there.

Unfortunately this problem came back a couple of days ago. Reported by the same user as last time. We upgraded to 4.7.19, but it did not fix it.

Many thanks.

Shouldn't we get notified via the forum incoming email address when a member use the built-in deletion request? We do not get any.

Can confirm that I was.

Got this in return: YOUR SUPPORT EMAIL WAS NOT RECEIVED. Thank you for contacting Invision Community! As a self hosting customer, we offer support via our staffed community support forums [1]. Please post your support needs there.

Many thanks, we will do that.

We did set "remove IP addresses from user posted content after the specified number of day" to 90 days back then, but IP's are still are being kept beyond that.

This problem is still not resolved.

It's only possible to add a new tag to the end of the list, but a closed list must be sorted alphabetically. To my knowledge it has been like this since the introduction of 4.X. In 3.X the list could be edited. Our taglist is 12 years old and we cannot add new tags because of this.

Are you planning to implement this in 4.x?