Michael

When people update their statuses in their profiles.

Would it be possible (in a future version, of course, unless it's something you can throw in easily enough) to make the 'report a post' feature use the javascript popup class? If you go into a topic and report the post, when you hit 'back' you get directed back to the page that actually sends the report, and the report gets sent again. If you could just popup a form where you could report the post, the 'back' button will then really go back again. Maybe I'm crazy, but I thought that the preview board did do it in a popup way back when.

Would work great, until the problem is you're getting a driver error upon attempting to log in to the ACP. There's nothing wrong with the current implementation.

It's not a bug. It's a custom profile field just like any other, IPS just set the field up on this site to show in the topic view too.

If you are multi-quoting posts, you are not giving a 'fast reply'.

It's often helpful to go back and re-read through the topic. Sure, I have read the topic at one point, but that was last week, and I've read a lot of stuff since then. I'd like to be able to refresh my memory of what all was discussed without starting at the post which is unread; that post may not even be on the same page I get taken to when I click the link to the topic.

As do I. I think it's important for IPS to note that many people are expressing these same views, while I don't know if I've ever heard anyone say they prefer this new way of displaying the data. They shouldn't take the relatively few users who do express their displeasure with the new setup (relatively as compared to their entire user base) as meaning that everyone who isn't saying anything likes the new way. Yes, there are roadblocks to achieving both the multi-tabbed interface and displaying the data we're all used to, but these concerns we've been having have been presented for several months now.

Topic starter, the number of views, and a way to get to the first post in the topic are all missing, I think. I use Today's Active Content mostly, but I think the same applies to the View New Content list too.

The link in the forum rules section may not work, but the link to the bug tracker is available at the top of every page here: http://forums.invisionpower.com/tracker/ If I recall, this has already been reported.

The current implementation replaces the badwords as the post is saved depending on whether the poster can post them or not. Your suggestion would require the posts to be checked for badwords 'on the fly' for every post. It may be feasible now in v3.0, because I guess there is parsing going on at display time, but it never was really possible before.

Is that what vbSEO does? That doesn't seem like it'd be worth it. It would have to run all links through something like cURL to fetch the page source and extract out the page title value. That doesn't seem like it'd be worth it to me, but I'm no SEO guru.

You just use the URL bbcode, this has been something built in to IP.Board for years: Invision Power Services

You mean like this? Invision Power Services

I believe if they are moved to the trash can, they still count as being there on your board, and thus included in your stats. But if they are just deleted, they will no longer show up in the count. And yes, I'm pretty sure that this recounting is done automatically upon completion of this action. The number of total posts in your stats always represents how many posts you actually have on your site at that point, not posts that were made and were then deleted. Those posts are 'gone' and there's no reliable way to track how many of them there were. Say you stored somewhere the number of posts you actually deleted completely, so that you could add that number into the number of posts still in your database in order to get the total number of posts ever made. If something should happen to that data about the number of deleted posts, there would be no reliable way to recover that number. You can always recount the number of rows in the posts table to get the number of posts still on your site, so that's what's used to build this stat.

I can understand your frustration, but what you deem as high priority may not be what most people feel. In order to accurately track what you're looking for, every single topic view would need logged. For many sites, that's an unrealistic expectation considering the number of not only registered members pinging the topics repeatedly, but guests and search engines. Would something like Google Analytics or a similar tool be able to capture this data?

Actually, my tool is for database changes, not files.

Deleting all posts is a fairly resource intensive action, particularly if the member has made a lot of posts. For each post you delete, you may need to rebuild the topic it was in (in case that post was the first or last post in the topic), and then you need to rebuild all forum data for all forums they posted in (so that the number of topics and posts in each is accurate), and then you need to rebuild the forum stats (so the total number of posts is accurate). When you delete all members' posts from the ACP, it does it in cycles of 50 posts, and redirects to a new page automatically where it does the next 50. You'd have to program something into the warn panel to be able to replicate this, as deleting all posts from someone who made 5,000 posts on the forums could not be done all in one shot. I would say that for the frequency of how often most folks need to do this, and this is just going off my experience here, it's enough that an Admin can do this option in the ACP as it comes up. Whenever I have needed to delete all posts from one member, I wasn't doing it when I was just warning them, I was doing it when I was banning them via the ACP, where I would have the ability to delete all of their posts right there anyway. Just my 2 cents.

[quote name='tera

Maybe you should show the options to Root Admins only then? I just can't help thinking that the current setup is not ideal. On at least two occasions already here on this site, I've had to tell someone that they had to enable IN_DEV just to change the positioning of a hook. Whenever they would do that, all users on the board could either get huge ugly errors or get info revealed to them that they shouldn't have. It would be one thing if a board admin could have a development board where they did have IN_DEV turned on so they could experiment with this, but even with that setup, once they figure out what needs changed there is still no way other than enabling IN_DEV on a production board to alter this (unless you want to edit serialized values directly in the database).

Currently, in order to edit a hook to change something like which template it hooks into, you have to turn on IN_DEV mode. This is bad because it puts the whole site into developers mode. We should be able to edit a hook's properties without having to enable IN_DEV.

Well, obviously you wouldn't just give ACP access to people who shouldn't be in there. If you have a team working on a translation, then I'd suggest you set up a test board for that, or give them the XML files with the text, or dump the contents of the database table that holds the language strings, or one of any number of other ways to get them access to the text.

You're supposed to make changes in the ACP, not in the language files. It's similar to the way skin changes have worked for a while, the files are just built by what's in the database, the database doesn't get updated by what's in the files.

The problem with doing this is that the actual posting screen can have a different layout depending on which forum you are posting in. If you have the ability to post HTML in one forum, the posting screen has to display that so you can choose its options. You could maybe do it where it gives you a list of forums to start your topic in, you choose one, and it then directs you to the posting page appropriate for that forum, but that wouldn't actually be any savings in the number of clicks or pages you have to visit.

*Shrugs shoulders* Doesn't matter, the answer is the same. No, you can't downgrade. You can backup prior to upgrading and restore that afterwards, but you can't actually downgrade.

No, there is no downgrade option. And the 2.0 software has not been available for many years now. It's extremely buggy, insecure, and outdated.