bfarber

With your cursor at the end of the quoted text you hit enter twice (normally - if you have any third party addons affecting this behavior then you may need to contact the author).

Payouts are not automatic - instead, you initiate a payout request whenever you like and then those requests are processed weekly (last I checked at least). Please let us know if you have any further questions!

Definitely - I think if we were to add such a field, it would need to be presented in a very user friendly matter so it doesn't confuse the average user.

Keep in mind, too, that you're looking at images named "IMG_2134.jpg" locally. Yes, in that case the filename isn't too useful and perhaps using the topic title may (or may not) be more beneficial. But what if I uploaded an image named "Roadsigns in germany.jpg" (I can tell you from first hand experience that some people, such as my wife, name every single image with a unique and useful name when they download the images to their computer). In that case using the filename would definitely be better than the topic title. The problem is - we don't have a reliable way to know which to use. I like the idea of nudging users to fill in more useful alt tags as suggested by @dayh. Sometimes it's better to use technology to push users to do more, rather than try to replace what they're capable of in the name of automation.

For what it's worth, as @opentype pointed out, images do still get indexed regardless. Google does not find a page, look at an image's alt tags, and use that as the only signal as to the meaning of a given image on the page. Google does a fairly good job looking at the image in the context of the page as a whole (and as noted is expanding heavily with its AI capabilities, particularly when it comes to analyzing images). And I'm not saying, of course, that some topic titles will match some images on a page. But if you step back and look at the example I supplied, the only image on this page is not relevant to the topic title, and this is not an uncommon scenario at all. Simply swapping out the file name (which often is related to the image itself) with the topic title is just shifting one potentially bad piece of data for another. From an automated perspective there's simply no way for software to know which is better.

Our existing uploader approach essentially does the exact same thing, except instead of queuing and requiring an extra click on "Start upload", the files begin uploading immediately. What from the page you linked to would you consider an improvement or better functionality, specifically?

It's really easy actually. Does "Alt images tags for SEO" actually describe the image in your post which I've just quoted? I don't believe it does. Something along the lines of "Google webmaster chart showing indexed URLs" would, but to do that...you would need human intervention, or good AI.

I'm afraid that at this time we do not have a ready-made converter for BuddyPress, however if this is something you require I would encourage you to submit your request to sales@invisionpower.com so we can take a closer look. It's possible we could work with you to develop a converter for BuddyPress data.

I don't believe, personally, there is any realistic way to "automate" applying a human-understandable textual description for an image, absent using some sort of AI-type service to do so. IOW, I don't think using the topic title will be an inherently better option.

The only "author" field supported by the RSS standard is for the author's email address (we do not generally make public an account's email address). It's not possible without using custom namespaces (or potentially switching to ATOM instead of RSS).

In most environments there would be no way for the software to have any idea how your email forwarders are set up at the server level.

You can increase the size of the text on screen in just about every browser. Using Chrome (what I have open right now), there's a magnifying glass to the right side of the address bar at the top of the page you can use.

Well, if you're afraid that a rogue moderator might flag a 10 year old member as a spammer out of malice, so you don't want their content deleted automatically, then I'd assume that same concern should apply to the member's other content such as their profile photo. It's a situation where you have to decide whether the convenience outweighs the risk/fear.

If you configure the IPS spam service to delete a user's content when they are flagged as a spammer, their profile picture should be deleted.