Jump to content

cyndisa

Clients
  • Posts

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About cyndisa

Recent Profile Visitors

785 profile views

cyndisa's Achievements

  1. The search in archived threads is something we've dealt with, too, and ultimately decided to unarchive everything. So has MySQL 5.6 been implemented for the cloud communities yet? Just curious because our community is waiting on this so we can switch to innodb, and so far, I've been told that the upgrade to MySQL 5.6 will happen sometime this year. Am not sure where to go for updates on when/if this has been done.
  2. Can't reproduce the problem of double clicking on an already inserted image and not being able to change that image in the dialogue? Insert any image into a post. Then double click on it, with the intent of changing the image. There are no options that allow that. The "Link URL" field allows you to put in a URL so that, when the image in the post is clicked on, a new page with the image at that URL is displayed. It might be the image you put in the post; but it could also be a different one - whatever you choose. That kind of option is fine. But I believe there should be an option (in the dialogue that appears when double clicking on an image) for changing the image that is actually displayed in the post.
  3. Our forum has a small group of members who enjoy playing Word Games, but the vast majority does not want to see those topics constantly presenting themselves in the VNC area. The Word Game threads tend to overwhelm our other, more important content. I took care of this in the past by simply telling that forum (in the ACP settings) that it was not allowed to appear in the VNC. There are no such settings in IPS 4, and I believe them to be crucial, especially in light of the fact that the "filter results by forum" settings in the VNC area do not "stick." I have chosen those settings - "filter results by forum" - in my own account several times now and they are continually forgotten by the software. IPS support has told me that I'm sorry, but it is ridiculous to have it programmed that way. We have 120-150 forums/subforums in our community. And we only want to exclude one of them from the VNC area. There ought to be a setting for each forum (when it's created ... and then editable later, as well) allowing that forum to not show in VNC. To ask users to manually choose their preferences (in our case, choosing all forums except for one) for the VNC every time they log into their accounts is adding insult to injury. There's not even a way, when choosing our VNC preferences to SHIFT > click and choose all subforums in the list and then CTRL > click to eliminate one. We have to click on each one individually - 120-150 forums individually! I find it hard to believe that this expectation is considered reasonable. And if the erasing of those filter settings is because my browser erases cookies every time I close it, then it only serves to make the point that a setting like this should not be dependent on cookies - another reason why the most effective way to exclude something from the VNC area is via the ACP forum settings. Now, having said all of that, I know that VNC (as we know it) is going away in 4.1. The Activity Streams are touted as highly customizable and user friendly. So my feedback here is more like feedback with a question attached: The filters in IPS 4's VNC are not effective. There needs to be an option in the ACP for excluding or including a forum, subforum, gallery, what-have-you, from or in the VNC area. Has this issue been fixed in 4.1? Will Activity Streams (with all pertinent preferences) actually "stick" without depending on cookies or a browser cache? If so, I and the rest of our community will be thrilled!! If not, then please, Invision, consider these comments and fix this problem.
  4. Thanks much for the info, AutoItScript! I'll look into this. Edit: Being IPS hosted, we don't have that option. It would be nice to see it included for hosted accounts. We used to have cPanel access, but no more. If we can't get to it that way, then a nice easy ACP option would be appreciated!
  5. Thanks, chilihead. Yes, I know about the report system. That's needed, obviously. Although your suggestion works in a black and white world, MADMAN, and I thank you for it, it doesn't compensate for the reaction of members to a privacy issue that, until our IPS 4 upgrade, they never had to deal with. In that sense, yes, it is the fault of the software. I believe that blocking a certain module of a member's account from admin view (based on a toggle-able permission) would go a long way towards calming the fears and questions (and probable loss of members). In my opinion, there needs to be the option for the administration to set such a permission to "not view PMs," thereby allowing administration to reassure members that admins can access PMs and will, if required by law, but that under normal operating procedures they cannot access the members' PMs. Call it mere semantics, if you will. But it feels necessary to me and to our community.
  6. Interesting, because IPS support says 4 letters, and we have numerous (I can't say "all" because I've not tested all) 3 letter words in titles that the search engine will not query.
  7. First of all, I don't want to get into a debate about whether admins should or should not read members' PMs. That's not my point here. What I want to suggest is that a new admin permission be included for viewing or not viewing a member's PMs when signed in as that member. Our community recently upgraded from 3.3.4 directly to IPS 4. This was, as you can imagine, quite a shock in a lot of ways - lots a changes to figure out and adapt to. Only in the past couple of days has it come to our attention that admins can read PMs so very easily by logging into a member's account. Such a thing was not possible in 3.3.4, and quite honestly, I was shocked when this became apparent in IPS 4! Why should my members have to sacrifice their privacy in this way? In general, this is a bad idea. In particular, we have extenuating circumstances (not criminal or the like) on our forum that make it even more troubling. There should, at the very least, be a way to exclude the ability to view PMs from an admin's permission set. And, yes, I know that for someone who knows how, PMs can still be viewed in the database. But that's not nearly as easy as it currently is by signing in as another user. The ease with which an admin could, theoretically, spy on members using a simple, otherwise helpful, tool in the ACP is what disturbs me so greatly. I'm not disputing the necessity of an admin needing the option to see a user's PMs. There are several scenarios (none of which have occurred in our forum, thankfully) where it might be necessary to either look at them oneself or to provide them to law enforcement. My contention is that there should be a setting to either restrict or allow admins to see those PMs, during the course of their regular duties.
  8. Could you point me to that option in the ACP? IPS support says that 4 is as low as it goes.
  9. I'm looking for a way to change the width of the emoticon window in the editor. Our members are quite annoyed with having to scroll both vertically and horizontally. Have already been in touch with IPS support, and their only advice was to see if I could find a hook or third party app for it. So far, I've come up empty handed. Could anyone here point me in the right direction?
  10. When I am creating or editing a post and I double click on an already inserted image (image from URL), my expectation is that I can edit the image URL from which the image is brought that displays in the post . However, I've found, after conversing with customer service that this is not the case. I thought that, upon double clicking on the image, I could insert the link to another image in the "Image" dialogue, "link URL" field and that the image would change to the image at the new URL. However, nothing changed in the editor. So, thinking that perhaps it would appear after submission, I submitted my edits. The post refreshed, and there was still no change to the image in the post. However, when I clicked on the image, it opened another window with the image I inserted in the "link URL" field. One image in the post, but a different one in the new window. Customer service assures me that this is the way it was designed to work (and I appreciate their answering my questions), but I believe it's badly implemented. It should be simple, intuitive to switch out an image when editing a post by double clicking on the image, instead of having to go through extra steps like making sure the image is highlighted, clicking on the dropdown menu "Insert other media," choosing "Insert image from URL," and only then being able to specify another desired image file. The double click on the image should present the user with the ability to change that image. The other more specialized image options in the "Image" dialogue are great, but the basic option to change what image is displayed in the post should not be left out.
  11. Exactly. One of our moderators has begun a thread for thread titles in our community that cannot be found in IPB search. While I admire and appreciate the mod's organization and willingness to document these things, it shouldn't be necessary. We should be able to customize the search engine's parameters / criteria.
  12. The automatic parsing of image links in the editor is something that gives me problems, as well. Frequently, we need to insert several images whose links vary by one character. Our preferred way of doing this is to simply copy the link, move the cursor back a bit, delete the wrong character, add the correct character, and post. However, with the automatic parsing, as soon as I move the cursor back into the link, the image parses and won't allow me to change the link, as needed. Don't get me wrong, I like the automatic parsing. (I'd like it better, if I could change a character in a link before it parsed, but ...) I'm used to using "Insert image from URL." I said all of this to say that I support the original post here where it's asserted that that option is too hidden - not at all intuitively found.
  13. Our community has sorely missed the search only in titles feature, and I got a little discouraged when I looked at the release notes for 4.1. In the Upcoming features tab that was on the release page previously, there was, I think, specific mention of the plan to reinstate search in titles. (Many of our members have been living for the update that will provide this!) But in the current 4.1 In development tab makes no reference to this that I can find. Did I just miss it? Also, we have a significant need to be able to search for words of fewer than 4 characters. In previous versions of IP.Board, this was possible. In IPS 4, it is not. Are there any plans to bring back customization features (in the ACP) for the search engine?
  14. Have been having the same problem since last night, when I wrote Invision support.
×
×
  • Create New...