AlexWebsites

I'm interested in this too.
Would you be able to make amazon and Ebay affiliate program work with this app?

Has anyone using this app incorporated ebay listing using ebay's api? My thought is to have ebay listings under the ads within each category as an option. There's a good earning potential with ebay's affiliate program. We used to run a classifieds section years ago and are looking into it again. We had ebay and amazon listings below with affiliate links using their api.

I saw an article about it today and its going to be leveraging more privacy and going as far allowing users to hide their emails by creating alternative emails with the 3rd party. Any emails to that created email will then forward through apple to the user. https://www.engadget.com/2019/06/04/sign-in-with-apple-privacy-security-google-facebook-wwdc/

I don't recall but if a user visits their notification settings and un-checks to Send me news and information, the check mark for the newsletter is still on. Do they receive the newsletter still with the main setting off? It doesn't shut off the newsletter toggle.

I still think having this in two different areas is misleading to users. Maybe a link under the notifications section to manage newsletters would be helpful. some don't find it right away.
I find that I can shut off the IPS setting in ACP but can't under the member page do this with the newsletter(s), so I have to login as the user and visit their settings when there is a request. It's too many steps as an admin.
Would be nice to have a setting under member view in ACP alongside and within the notifications settings.

Hi @TheJackal84
many thanks for your work.
1) Do you plan a counter in the menu how much members are in chatrooms as described by @AlexWebsites?

2) I think all users should be in the "Who's online"-list. Could you implement a setting if users can be anonym in chatroom or not?
3) We don't want to have chat messages in search, activity and so on. Is it possible?
4) If an user enters a chatroom all old messages should be killed. The chatroom should be empty. Is it possible?
 

You submit RSS like sitemaps, same area, they are just listed along with your sitemaps in the Google Webmaster.
https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2014/10/best-practices-for-xml-sitemaps-rssatom.html

I was of the same thought that the more you index will correlate to more traffic, but it just isn’t so if the content is not quality. Pages with what google sees as not valuable content (empty profile pages) can get dropped and if they don’t, don’t rank for anything good anyway. IPS default sitemap does include profile pages but excludes ones with no content, which I think is better. You don’t want spiders wasting time with pages that have no valuable/ranking content.
However, I do think some forum pages are not getting crawled for some reason and it’s likely due to content not being of value to Google or spiders not getting there. I also think older topics get ranked less than newer ones.
One thing I know works is to have well written topic titles, which in turn are your page title tags. I’ve edited many topic titles and have seen them rank better afterwards.

The more pages you send to Google to crawl, the more pages Google has to split its resources over. Google will have a finite "crawl budget" for your site - how much resources it will spend crawling your site. If you send Google a ton of links to crawl that are low quality, you ultimately take resources away from Google crawling your higher quality content. You will find that as usual, it's quality over quantity.
You are incorrect about profiles not being included in the sitemap (there is an option to toggle it off in the AdminCP - make sure it's enabled).
Example: https://invisioncommunity.com/sitemap.php?file=sitemap_profiles_1

I was of the same thought that the more you index will correlate to more traffic, but it just isn’t so if the content is not quality. Pages with what google sees as not valuable content (empty profile pages) can get dropped and if they don’t, don’t rank for anything good anyway. IPS default sitemap does include profile pages but excludes ones with no content, which I think is better. You don’t want spiders wasting time with pages that have no valuable/ranking content.
However, I do think some forum pages are not getting crawled for some reason and it’s likely due to content not being of value to Google or spiders not getting there. I also think older topics get ranked less than newer ones.
One thing I know works is to have well written topic titles, which in turn are your page title tags. I’ve edited many topic titles and have seen them rank better afterwards.

I have run an experiment for over a month. I have increased the number of entries in one sitemap from 500 to 1500 and have added lastmod date to the sitemap index that contains the last modification date of the newest entry in the sitemap (and NOT the timestamp of sitemap generation). Result: there was a slight increase in page indexed by Google, BUT there was no change in organic search traffic. 
For me it is not worth just increasing the number of pages in index if there is no influence on traffic. That's why I have given up to "optimize" the sitemap. Can somebody here give a prove that number of pages in Google index correlates with organic search traffic from Google? I mean the traffic is the goal at the end of the day and not the number of indexed pages.

The question is, has your organic traffic gone up with more indexed pages from your new sitemap?

Not yet.
If you hear nothing about it then it's purely because I haven't looked in it - when I do, and I make a decision, then I will update here.

It works on my end now, thank you.

I've uploaded a new version fixing this.

I don't think it will have any impact, mostly because we use canonical meta tags to prevent duplicate "pages" being indexed. When I clicked on this topic I ended up at URL:
https://invisioncommunity.com/forums/topic/442742-large-community-you-have-a-problems-with-sitemap/page/10/?tab=comments#comment-2784429 In the HTML page source I have
<link rel="canonical" href="https://invisioncommunity.com/forums/topic/442742-large-community-you-have-a-problems-with-sitemap/page/10/" /> So when Google visits the URL I did, the resulting URL they will index is 
https://invisioncommunity.com/forums/topic/442742-large-community-you-have-a-problems-with-sitemap/page/10/  
With your customization you are attempting to send signals to Google "look at this URL and this URL and this URL" all from the same topic with the same canonical tag, which is different from the URL in the sitemap. I think, if anything, this will cause confusion to Google's spiders along the lines of "why does their sitemap say to index url X but when we visit it they tell us the canonical URL is Y?"

@DawPi has completed the custom sitemap application that I mentioned which handles all posts. You can see an example of it here:
https://www.celiac.com/sitemap_posts.php
but it is modeled after the existing sitemap--but this one handles just forum posts. We were not able to add a minimum word count to this application, as one person suggested, because it slowed things down and put a load on the CPU. We were, however, able to add the ability to exclude certain forums, for example my site has around 25 different forums, so I was able to exclude a general chit chat and a technical support forum that are more or less off the main topic of my site.
Whether or not this will be a benefit or liability in Google search is an open question, but I'll follow up here with any noticeable changes, positive or negative.
I believe this will have positive results, simply because we are making it easier for Google to index specific content and allow them to provide more relevant search results for any given query. Currently Google's results may send people to a topic page like this one /page/10/, and the person who searched will still have to fish on it for the specific results of their query. With all posts indexed, Google should be able to send the person directly to the content that answers their query...at least that is my hope here.
Anyone interested in this app can contact @DawPi
Here is a screenshot of the admin page:

For clarify - it currently hides content if the user viewing the content is a member of the groups chosen in the plugin settings.
Am I correct in reading that you would like to be able to hide content if the post has been made by a member of a group instead?

Two different chat apps by two different developers. 

Exactly

It was a feature in previous IPS Chat version. In the main menu where Chat tab is, there was a number of currently active users in the chat. If there is nobody in the chat, then there is just a "Chat" if there are two users, then the menu tab looks like "Chat (2)". 

I still cannot get any custom profile field to show, is anyone else having issues?

I have finial updated to 4.4.1 sorry delay been working overtime get this finished.

.ipsApp_front is also a class on the body element, so you need to remove the space (I've also moved that class to the front of the selector for clarity):
body.ipsApp_front[data-pageapp="forums"][data-pagemodule="forums"][data-pagecontroller="index"] .ipsBreadcrumb { display: none !important; } An alternative way is using the data-pagelocation attribute in the same way you've used the others, since that tells you whether it's 'front' or 'admin':
body[data-pagelocation="front"][data-pageapp="forums"][data-pagemodule="forums"][data-pagecontroller="index"] .ipsBreadcrumb { display: none !important; } Either of those approaches should work 🙂 

Is mailbouncer working with 4.4? I do not see 4.4 in the compatibility box.