sibomots

The Editor in IPS Community is a third-party add-on.  CKEditor, or something if memory serves.
Question is -- can that editor be extended?  Markdown extension to the Editor?  Users are wondering, so I'm asking.
If not, so be it.  Just not something I worry about but they do.
 

Does your plugin provide capability in this scenario:  (version 4.7.2.1)
 
Alice posts. Bob reports it (bad post Alice) Moderator Charlie is aware of the Report and moves the disposition to some state -- In work, or whatever the enumeration is. Bob is notified of the event that Moderator Charlie is working the issue?   Moderator Charlie works the issue and resolves it, moving the disposition of the report to "completed" or whatever the enumeration is. Bob is notified again by the system that this change of disposition has occurred. When Moderator Charlie closes (final state in the state tree of the Resolution), Bob is notified yet again that the issue is Closed/Finished/etc.. whatever. In other words, when the Moderator Charlie does "work" on the issue and the disposition (state) is changed, Bob is notified of those events.
In other words, the Moderator doesn't have to literally manually notify Bob.   Mere changes to the state of the Report cause Bob to be notified?
Is that what your plugin provides -- or close to it?   Do you have PDF (or web) manual of your Plugin?
Thanks.
 

A little better query so the admin can focus on the `preference_key` to examine later:
select M.name, M.email, PP.notification_key, PP.preference from core_members M, ibf_core_notification_preferences PP where PP.member_id = M.member_id and exists (select P.notification_key from core_notification_preferences P where P.member_id = M.member_id and P.preference = 'email')  

Nevermind, I think I found the linkage:
 
select M.name, M.email from ibf_core_members M where exists (select P.notification_key from ibf_core_notification_preferences P where P.member_id = M.member_id and P.preference = 'email') I can work it from this.

I'm very reluctant to say, and it genuinely saddens me to say that, but I just think the IC team doesn't care about the "small client" anymore.
since a few months back I've been getting a feeling that IC have had their sights set on some goal (financial, if I'm correctly reading between the lines) and they don't let feedback get in their way. I (and it seems like quite a few different community managers/owners) have been having this feeling since the "Zapier's gonna only be for CiC clients" blog post.
Feels like something was "switched on" and the devs' responses to feedback suddenly changed. 
I myself started a couple of threads about this issue, both were commented on (one of them after having a private conversation with a team member) with something along the lines of "yeah, that's great" or "pretty" and nothing more was done.
Here's an example - a poll that ended in a landslide, and NOTHING was done besides some - excuse my french - asinine comments that COMPLETELY ignored that main issue and only acknowledged some side remarks made in other comments. 
And another one, where honest conversation was exactly what you said - constructive, sincere, and in good faith. Besides the mandatory "yeahhhh dude, we totally get you", pretty much nothing was done to address concerns that were brought up.
Lately another line in sand was crossed with an e-mail sent to clients basically saying they're going to pawn off support to the community forums, sorry, I mean they're "keen to invest in our community support by asking that your first point of contact for support as an active license holder be in our new support area on our forums." because "Creating a strong support community backed by our support technicians will result in a more detailed and richer set of answers."
I, for one, am on starting to give up any hope that taking any feedback that isn't "that's great!" into consideration is anywhere on IC's roadmap. It's unfortunate especially since we switched to IC from VB for exactly those reasons after years of VB "knowing better" and making their platform more and more frustrating to use. I'd hate to see IC go down the same path. 
Big sad.

After about 15 minutes of scrolling through and peeking at other topics I found it.  For anyone else looking:
https://invisioncommunity.com/forums/topic/461760-has-member-title-been-removed/
 
Marc,
In my other life I am a software PM who also works with clients directly.  I say this to communicate that I 100% understand the problems of feature creep; I understand that you can't satisfy everyone all of the time.  Compromises have to be made.  And I understand how hard it can be to deal with customers who just want what they want, and don't see all the work going on under the hood, or the reasons why certain features can't co-exist.
But there is still a line between making compromises to achieve good releases (which is necessary!) and ignoring customer feedback entirely (which is ultimately counterproductive).
In reading threads here, a few things pop out that concern me, and make it feel (rightly or wrongly! -- but this feedback is about the impression Invision is giving off) that Invision would rather "paint the roses red" than provide good service to its existing customers:
- the fact that issues are marked "resolved" when they are replied to, rather than when the issue has actually been resolved
- the fact that there is a rule banning user plug-ins that replace functionality (however popular) that Invision has removed
- the developer replies...
At best, the developer replies are what you put here - "Thank you for your feedback."  This is a good way to respond to unreasonable customers (I guess it feels like my feedback is unreasonable!).  More frequently, they are dismissive and defensive.  Nobody ever says "I hear you guys, we're going to give this a think."  I see devs accusing users of lying or inflating situations they have encountered.  This is not a good faith customer relationship!  It seems like Invision begins with the presumption that all customer feedback is unreasonable or wrong, and you just have to make us understand why.
Despite all the comments in the other thread explaining how much people and their members were invested in text ranks and custom titles, the existing ways to use them were removed.  Using text ranks can now only be done with manual CSS edits -- if somebody made a plug-in for it, it wouldn't even be allowed to be shared here!  Custom titles can sort of be retained using a combination of settings, but the display is now tied to other profile fields as well, and frankly, if you enable them using that method, the display is pretty ugly.  Again, manual CSS edits are required to preserve the old functionality.
Although I appreciate that you guys at least did preserve existing data in response to the customer feedback... it's insane that feedback was required, for you not to obliterate user data.  And all of this feedback was given PRIOR to the rollout... and all the popular functionality was still removed.  I know (believe me I know!) that sometimes things are more complicated to implement than they appear, but we're literally talking about a toggle, a conditional statement, and a small patch of (existing) CSS.
Respectfully, I think there may be room for improvement in your user testing process, and maybe your development timelines, given the data obliteration issue you narrowly avoided, and the Invision responds to paying customer feedback.  It just doesn't make any sense.  And your customers deserve better.  There are reasons we choose IPB (and obviously I'm still choosing it or I wouldn't be posting here 🙂 ) but it isn't the only option, and the approach I see on these forums makes me feel a lot more lukewarm about it.
Sincerely, constructively, and in good faith,
-slarrr

I didn't see in the OP if the site as self hosted on a system that can provide key authentication or not.
My advice, if it's a unix-like system (Linux, etc..) and self-hosted
1. Don't use plain text password authentication with SSH.  Use Keys.
2. Do you have shell users on your system who can come and go as they please?  If so, then re-organize your user/group permissions such that these 'guest' users cannot modify your site files. A little finesse with user/group permissions for the shell users on the site would be in order. If you don't have users crawling around your system (on your staff), disregard.  See also man pages for `chown`, `chgrp`, `chmod` and `umask`
3. You're right that it's a problem -- how someone got shell access to modify the files means you have more than an IPS access issue to deal with.  They were in the system.  I could not sleep with that situation -- someone not authorized to do so crawling around my system?  I'd nuke it from orbit, and re-image and begin to evaluate what the worst case scenario is --- is/was any thing on the system personal information?
/onsoapbox
If it was me, I'd extract the Database, save off any important data, save what you want to keep, etc..
Flea-bomb the entire machine (flatten it and reimage) reinstall the OS, etc.. and then re-install what has to go back on, re-install IPS, etc.. But this time tighten down the access.  No password authentication to the site.  Got to use keys.  That's a start.
/offsoapbox