Wolfie

I don't like that. Yes I'm a little biased since I have a Lifetime license, but I think that the Lifetime license shouldn't be excluded because the terms of it are the same as a standard license except that it's "forever" instead of limited to 6 month windows.

With Perpetual, the license holder should be allowed to get it when they are in +Active status (ie, paid $30/year).

I know that IPS wants to convert those into standard licenses, but I think that's a bit shameful to try to reword or reclassify things just to do it.

I've used it may be 3 times in the last month. I know someone has it as part of their signature, but that's not me.

I just believe that if someone have +Active Customer status because of an IP.Board license, then that should qualify them for this feature. After all, if a Perp license holder pays the $30 for a year of service, then they are a current customer. The Lifetime holders are always current.

Now, if you want to say that Standard license holders get it for free while their license is active and then charge (say $10/year) for Perp/Lifetime license holders to obtain the service, I could go with that. But to make an announcement that it's for those with active IP.Board licenses, then to turn around and say "active" doesn't include lifetime/perp license holders, that's just shameful. Should have just said that it's free to those with an active Standard IP.Board License.

I'm juggling my licenses around anyway and plan to make use of the added feature on the board that currently has the lifetime license (but will swap that with the other board license). Just would have been nice to have it for both boards.

Question though, once someone has the key to use the function, does it only work while their license is active, or is it only required to be active when they put the key in but remains in effect from then on?

I don't like that. Yes I'm a little biased since I have a Lifetime license, but I think that the Lifetime license shouldn't be excluded because the terms of it are the same as a standard license except that it's "forever" instead of limited to 6 month windows.

With Perpetual, the license holder should be allowed to get it when they are in +Active status (ie, paid $30/year).

I know that IPS wants to convert those into standard licenses, but I think that's a bit shameful to try to reword or reclassify things just to do it.

I just believe that if someone have +Active Customer status because of an IP.Board license, then that should qualify them for this feature. After all, if a Perp license holder pays the $30 for a year of service, then they are a current customer. The Lifetime holders are always current.

Now, if you want to say that Standard license holders get it for free while their license is active and then charge (say $10/year) for Perp/Lifetime license holders to obtain the service, I could go with that. But to make an announcement that it's for those with active IP.Board licenses, then to turn around and say "active" doesn't include lifetime/perp license holders, that's just shameful. Should have just said that it's free to those with an active Standard IP.Board License.

I'm juggling my licenses around anyway and plan to make use of the added feature on the board that currently has the lifetime license (but will swap that with the other board license). Just would have been nice to have it for both boards.

Question though, once someone has the key to use the function, does it only work while their license is active, or is it only required to be active when they put the key in but remains in effect from then on?

If I were a lifetime license holder, it would be a tough choice because converting would force me to spend a good amount of money per 6 months.

If I were a perpetual license holder though, I'd rather convert to the standard license rather than having to pay extra fee for this unproven service. I would assume that the old(er) license holders will continue to be left out, and I wouldn't blame IP for taking such actions. Things ... don't remain the same forever. You can either choose to go with the flow or resist it (or abandon IP products all together).

You mean downgrade. At least in my book.


As far as the service. Thanks, but no thanks. I plan on keeping my license. :)

Looking at the quote from the first post, a Lifetime license holder qualifies for this:



However like I said, if it were worded to say "Standard IP.Board License" or something to that effect, that would be different. Also, as I'm aware that IPS is trying to boost its revenue (while also covering expenses), why not offer the service to Lifetime/Perp license holders for like $10/year? That would give the option to keep the current license but still generate additional revenue for IPS. Win-Win situation.

What about my other question? Does their Spam-Monitoring end when their status goes to inactive or does it continue?

I see.

This new feature is a "service" as the name states : Spam monitoring service. And a service like this involves a monthly cost. I would completely understand not providing this service to Lifetime license holders, but I feel that Perpetual license holders are in a gray zone.

Still, it's not like this service is essential.

Furthermore, we do not know how this new service is going to hold up against spammers.

I don't like that. Yes I'm a little biased since I have a Lifetime license, but I think that the Lifetime license shouldn't be excluded because the terms of it are the same as a standard license except that it's "forever" instead of limited to 6 month windows.

With Perpetual, the license holder should be allowed to get it when they are in +Active status (ie, paid $30/year).

I know that IPS wants to convert those into standard licenses, but I think that's a bit shameful to try to reword or reclassify things just to do it.

Well then couldn't a new type of license be made, available only to Lifetime/Perp holders, where they pay $10/year (renewable at anytime, just like the standard IP.Board license)? That way IPS is making money (as I mentioned in my previous post) but not forcing the customer to change their license type?

With the Reputation System, I would like links in your profile to show what posts you have given and what posts you have received rep for.

That argument is on pretty shaky ground. You might, in that case, start charging extra for FURLs, AJAX skins, or any other progression in the software... as far as I'm concerned, my license entitles me to use IPB and it's features in all future versions, forever... You're moving the goal posts in order to sheppard legacy customers into your newer pricing bracket...

... and yes, I do pay my annual support fee already.

Your interpretation of what WallBase said is your own. I take it to mean that so far, he's had no problems with it so to him, it's working perfectly.

So how about calming down some, it was really unnecessary to call him ignorant.

In the words of Rodney King, "Can we all just get along?"

Done. Will be in 3.0.2. Too many template, lang and file edits to release a quick 'patch'.

I think the small change that Collins made should be used in future updates :)

I send them PM's from time to time and either don't get immediate responses or no responses at all. BUT considering how busy they are and considering how many PM's they probably get from a lot of others, I don't assume anything by it. They're either too busy to respond, meant to get back to you but forgot, or didn't know that a response was necessary.

In short, relax. :)

I send them PM's from time to time and either don't get immediate responses or no responses at all. BUT considering how busy they are and considering how many PM's they probably get from a lot of others, I don't assume anything by it. They're either too busy to respond, meant to get back to you but forgot, or didn't know that a response was necessary.

In short, relax. :)

That would suck, especially if you do it by accident and were no where near ready to submit the post.

If the first option is checked, the second one gets hidden.

Not really asking, just know that someone is going to create a thread asking, so thought I'd toss it up so that the initial "When It's Ready™" and complaints about people trying to rush IPS will all be out of the way.

:)


Disclaimer:
If you think I'm actually asking when IP.Board v3.0.2 will be released, then you need to read this post again. Continue until you stop thinking that I'm seriously asking.

That's nothing, I have version 867.53.09 so beat that. :)

What about the idea of multi-row application tabs or (preferred) ability to have drop-down menus with various applications in it, much like in the ACP but where the admin can choose what goes into which tab, the order, etc.

When deleting any member (or members), allow the option to perform additional functions on the members before the deletion is complete. These additional functions can include banning the email address, user name, login name, IP address or entering notes for the deletion reason (old member, abusive user, etc). This includes deleting members who are in the middle of validating accounts.

Not only that but (as I requested before), allow reasons for bans to be given per ban. If a member is being deleted (or their information is to be banned but the member not deleted), allow the ban to link back to the members account.

This would help greatly in keeping track of why bans or deletions were made and could help improve the security of the board as Admin could always have notes readily available for why actions were taken.