Dll

Have you considered moving your hosting over to the likes of google, as then you can use their mysql proxy to connect via ssl

https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/mysql/sql-proxy

Or use an open source proxy such as this one:

http://www.proxysql.com/

2 hours ago, sadams101 said:

I disagree with the canonical link solving this issue. In fact, the canonical link is simply wrong here. IT SHOULD SAY ?page=1, 2, etc., because the unique information on all of those unique pages that are being indexed is being sent to the wrong place. <snip>

 

Errm, not sure what you're looking at there, as it's all set correctly. As per your original example, if there was a link to  page 0 or page 1, they have a canonical of:

<link rel="canonical" href="https://invisioncommunity.com/forums/topic/442742-large-community-you-have-a-problems-with-sitemap/" />

Which makes sense, since those are all essentially the first page of the thread, so don't require (and shouldn't have) the pagination in the url for seo purposes. So all good so far. 

But for page 2, the canonical is:

<link rel="canonical" href="https://invisioncommunity.com/forums/topic/442742-large-community-you-have-a-problems-with-sitemap/?page=2" />

Page 3 has a canonical to ?page=3, and so on. 

On top of that, Invision also have the tags to let google know it's a paginated thread, which again is good seo, as google then knows to link the pages together as one set, and it may also show the page links in search. For instance on page 2, the tags are:

<link rel="first" href="https://invisioncommunity.com/forums/topic/442742-large-community-you-have-a-problems-with-sitemap/" />
<link rel="prev" href="https://invisioncommunity.com/forums/topic/442742-large-community-you-have-a-problems-with-sitemap/" />
<link rel="next" href="https://invisioncommunity.com/forums/topic/442742-large-community-you-have-a-problems-with-sitemap/?page=3" />
<link rel="last" href="https://invisioncommunity.com/forums/topic/442742-large-community-you-have-a-problems-with-sitemap/?page=8" />

So no need to rant, and no need to get someone to fix it for you, as it's already been done ? 

On 3/17/2018 at 3:21 PM, mark007 said:

There are a few problems in indexing pages:

https://invisioncommunity.com/forums/topic/442742-large-community-you-have-a-problems-with-sitemap/?page=0

is the same as

https://invisioncommunity.com/forums/topic/442742-large-community-you-have-a-problems-with-sitemap/?page=1

and the same as

https://invisioncommunity.com/forums/topic/442742-large-community-you-have-a-problems-with-sitemap/

 

There isn't a problem with those pages, as the canonical is set to the correct one on all of them:

<link rel="canonical" href="https://invisioncommunity.com/forums/topic/442742-large-community-you-have-a-problems-with-sitemap/" />

1 hour ago, Kevin Carwile said:

 

return $content->item();

 

 

This returns an error unfortunately:

• Result: "Incorrect entity class (IPS\\forums\\Topic). Expecting IPS\\forums\\Topic\\Post<br>Line: 209 of CustomData.php"

Thanks, I'll give that a go!

1 hour ago, Kevin Carwile said:

There are stock actions built in for custom data fields.

Perhaps this is a bug then - as I see the same as @jair101 - the stock functions work great for member based data fields, but none show for topic or topic comment based fields. 

1 hour ago, Kevin Carwile said:

What is the point you are stuck on? If you are doing other things when a post is reported, add another action in the same spot to increase your custom data field value by 1. No PHP needed.

It seems to need php to do anything with a topic based custom data field, unless I'm doing something wrong there?

Hoping somebody maybe able to help with the php code for this, as we have no-one who does php here. 

In short, I'd like to create a custom data field which counts the number of reports a post has received. I have the rules set up to do other things when a post is reported, but so far have been unable to make the counter which we can use to trigger other actions.

Any help will be much appreciated. 

Thanks

Thanks Matt, this and the new anti-spam measures are much appreciated!

Hi, we're using the status update hook, and our members love it but we're starting to see instances of people joining to spam it, which isn't so helpful. I know we could stop new members from editing their profile but that seems a bit draconian, so it would be really good to see a per usergroup option to disable the ability to do status updates.

Any chance?

Cheers

I really can't understand the point you're making Fast Lane, in order to fully support IE6, IPB would have to remove the features in 3.0 which are using the new technology which is spreading across the web at the moment. If they did that, then IPB would lag way behind many of the other forums and social networking sites out there and would risk alienating the 77% of people who are used to the new technology and come to expect the features it brings.

Are you seriously saying they should do this?