bfarber

We will be providing more information on this soon. Our priorities have been with IPB and getting it fixed up and stable for as many customers as possible first. :)

We will be providing more information on this soon. Our priorities have been with IPB and getting it fixed up and stable for as many customers as possible first. :)

We will be providing more information on this soon. Our priorities have been with IPB and getting it fixed up and stable for as many customers as possible first. :)

We will be providing more information on this soon. Our priorities have been with IPB and getting it fixed up and stable for as many customers as possible first. :)

We will be providing more information on this soon. Our priorities have been with IPB and getting it fixed up and stable for as many customers as possible first. :)

We will be providing more information on this soon. Our priorities have been with IPB and getting it fixed up and stable for as many customers as possible first. :)

Well, if you want "most" bugs fixed we're already there. :)

There's around 50 open bugs roughly (not counting FFFV reports) and 241 fixed bugs in 3.0.1. ;)

We can never fix "all" bugs in any particular release. Every day we come in, there's more new bugs reported. If we tried to have all open bugs resolved, you'd never get 3.0.1 released.

I've said this before, but I'll reiterate - people shouldn't get hung up on the raw number of bugs. It means nothing. Hardcoded text is reported as a bug, but for the majority of our users that's not an issue. Importing a language pack using windows-2943692837 when the original translator used iso-8859-1927889237 doesn't convert correctly in 3.0.0 - again, for the majority of our users this doesn't matter.

There will be bugs reported but not yet fixed when 3.0.1 is released, I'm positive of that.

You have an excellent point to be honest. I wouldn't have looked at that suggestion twice if it was submitted through the ticket system, but there are obviously a lot of people who agree since it was posted here, so I'm forced to reconsider my stance. Even if I don't think it has any value, features are driven by customer demand.

You have an excellent point to be honest. I wouldn't have looked at that suggestion twice if it was submitted through the ticket system, but there are obviously a lot of people who agree since it was posted here, so I'm forced to reconsider my stance. Even if I don't think it has any value, features are driven by customer demand.

Well, if you want "most" bugs fixed we're already there. :)

There's around 50 open bugs roughly (not counting FFFV reports) and 241 fixed bugs in 3.0.1. ;)

"Suspended" is a temporary ban. Instead of suspending the user, you could instead move them to another user group that had the restrictions you wish (can only access certain forums).

As for banning, there are many different methods of banning in IPB. You can move the users to a Banned user group, mark the user "Banned" from the ACP (which won't change their group, but will prevent accessing the board), ban the email, username or IP address in the ban filters, or suspend the user, for example. It depends on what method you use. If you move the user to the banned group, they cannot access the board. If you mark the user as banned from the edit member page in the ACP, their group will not change, but they still won't be able to access the board.

We can never fix "all" bugs in any particular release. Every day we come in, there's more new bugs reported. If we tried to have all open bugs resolved, you'd never get 3.0.1 released.

I've said this before, but I'll reiterate - people shouldn't get hung up on the raw number of bugs. It means nothing. Hardcoded text is reported as a bug, but for the majority of our users that's not an issue. Importing a language pack using windows-2943692837 when the original translator used iso-8859-1927889237 doesn't convert correctly in 3.0.0 - again, for the majority of our users this doesn't matter.

There will be bugs reported but not yet fixed when 3.0.1 is released, I'm positive of that.

I think it would be cool if a hook could be assigned to more than one access point as well (at least a template hook)

If that's all that's needed, I'd be fine with adding that back in.

Some unicode symbols trigger browsers to display text as RTL. No big deal.

As for the discussion at hand, the top button serves no useful purpose at all. Not even a little. It lets you get to the top of the screen, that's it. Except there's about 10 different methods of accomplishing this, with or without a mouse button or keyboard, built into your operating system and browser already. It's clutter that serves no purpose, which we've avoided with 3.0 in an effort to streamline the user interface and make it easier for novices. Some users, when they see 15000 buttons on a row, tend to just ignore them all (guilty!). Now, you only have icons relevant to the data point (e.g. for posts, icons related to that post, of which "the top button" does not qualify).

Meh, this has been debated to death. Suffice it to say, Rikki has had no intentions of bringing it back, and I don't blame him. ;)

We sincerely appreciate all the hard work our volunteer teams put in. We also sincerely appreciate you taking the time out to thank them for this hard work. :)

Some unicode symbols trigger browsers to display text as RTL. No big deal.

As for the discussion at hand, the top button serves no useful purpose at all. Not even a little. It lets you get to the top of the screen, that's it. Except there's about 10 different methods of accomplishing this, with or without a mouse button or keyboard, built into your operating system and browser already. It's clutter that serves no purpose, which we've avoided with 3.0 in an effort to streamline the user interface and make it easier for novices. Some users, when they see 15000 buttons on a row, tend to just ignore them all (guilty!). Now, you only have icons relevant to the data point (e.g. for posts, icons related to that post, of which "the top button" does not qualify).

Meh, this has been debated to death. Suffice it to say, Rikki has had no intentions of bringing it back, and I don't blame him. ;)

Working on the other groups, but should be fixed (to 20) for Active customers group.

Working on the other groups, but should be fixed (to 20) for Active customers group.

If you guys start going over 20 we can revisit it.

Working on the other groups, but should be fixed (to 20) for Active customers group.

We're focusing on 3.0.1 at the moment, but you'll hear more about it soon.

If you guys start going over 20 we can revisit it.

Working on the other groups, but should be fixed (to 20) for Active customers group.