Ryan H.

I don't know if they've been released yet, but both of the classic skins have been upgraded as community projects. You can see and use them on this forum.

I'm not sure what the big deal is here, to be honest. There was a bug reported. It was investigated, the problem identified, the issue resolved in the next release following the report. That's normal procedure for bugs. Perhaps this bug is more annoying to you than other bugs, but in reality it's no different than any other bug that gets reported.

IPS Staff: I hate to say this but the IPS Upgrades are becoming a real inconvenient Annoyance.

What am I talking about? Everytime there is a service update to IPB (2.0.1, 3.0.2, etc) the upgrade creates havok with the hooks that I have installed. Not only do I have to disable the hooks, but, they have to be un-installed and then re-installed. The upgrades are not anticipating already installed hooks and adjusting for them and it's becoming an annoyance.

Does IPS plan on fixing this problem or is this going to be a regular 'romp and stomp' action with every upgrade/update? For one, I would love to see this corrected.

I have four (4) tickets also, two of them are 3 days old, 1 is 1 day, 1 is 2day.
When Could I expect solution and my site would work in good shape?
Regards

The fact that such a script exists is not really the issue. Now if this topic included instructions on how to 'inject' that script onto a site through a vulnerability in IPS product, then I agree we should all be worried and screaming for the topic to be removed.

And this is exactly why they generally don't. If something happens that keeps it from happening, people say "But you promised it in this thread right here. See that thread, they said it was going to happen, but it did not! OMG IPS IS HORRIBLE! I can't do my new site and the world is ending... oh what a world, what a world!"

OK... so I'm being a bit sarcastic there, lol. However when something happens that keeps a date from being released, people tend to freak out. As someone who deals with managing user exceptions at work, I know exactly where they're coming from with being reluctant to give any kind of dates.

I have no idea what you've been waiting for since 2.3.0. The ACP was not language-abstractable, but we made it so in 3.0. There was no native RTL support, and we've added it for 3.0 out of the box, and have slowly been improving it in IE7 (the only browser that has issues with our implementations). IPB never supported locale support before 3.0, allowing you to customize the date formats for your own language.

All of this is done for internationalization and language-independence, and then when 2 strings aren't translated you accuse us of not caring about our customers?

Sigh.

On Alexa:



Mid May: When site staff were instructed to install the Alexa toolbar or extension.


I don't put much value on its rankings, personally.

This isn't something likely we'd endeavor to accommodate. I'd recommend looking into a new hosting plan/host in reality. Eventually, you can simply outgrow a hosting plan.

Oh! So Matt says it and you listen! I see how it is...

I shall go pout in the corner now. Woe is me, etc.
:(

I think it was around $150 when yearly licenses were about $60. I know I paid $200 or more for my lifetime license when it was available. I don't recall the exact amount.

But as I said before, it's not about what you paid for the license, or how much you pay to renew it. A license is a license, and should be considered equal. They should be giving it to all license holders, or make it separate service. I'm not against paying something to help with the costs of running this service (as it seems to be their concern), I just don't appreciate their initial tactic.

They're talking about it, so we'll wait. But I expect nothing less than equal treatment for every license holder. What ever is/was paid for a license should not be put into the equation.

bfarber: The way I see it is the standard license $25 fee is for support and upgrades, nothing else. If you bend it to "future services" then by that token you should do it to the perpetual license since they pay $30 per year for support. And if you give it to them, lifetime license holders should get it free. The closest thing I have to compare to this service is the resource site: Without an active support contract, you cannot access it. Standard license holders pay $25 every six months, perpetual license holders pay $30 per year, and lifetime license holders pay nothing. But they get access to the same "service". And technically I would consider the resource site a "service" the same as the spam monitor.

I ask for every license holder to get it, or for none of them to get it and have a yearly fee. That would be fair to everyone. And it's much simpler to charge no one, or charge everyone. And as far as who is paying what for their license, in order to be fair you can't look at that. Regardless of what the initial agreement was, a license is a license. I have an active support contract, I get access to the resource site "service". The spam monitor should be treated the same for all, or different for all. It's as simple as that.

This is the way I see it:

You should have known full well you were going to piss a lot of people off by telling them that lifetime/perp license holders could not use this service, and that they could one-way convert their licenses to a standard license to use this service. Especially given the nature of the service: A way to stop spam, something that should be a stock feature available to everyone. I'm sure you talked about it for a while, but I can't believe it didn't cross someone's mind before posting the announcement. If you have retracted the statement and are working on it further, an ajustment to the annoucement needs to be made.

As I've said before, a license holder is a license holder. You can't discriminate one from the other, regardless of what the arrangement was. If you are extending the support fee for this, you should do it for the other licenses as well, regardless of who pays what. I also know that by giving it to the standard license holders, you are not increasing your revenue by any margin to cover the costs of the server required for this service. This leads me to believe that it is not about cost, but a way to get people to convert their licenses. If you still wish to honor them, honor them.

If this is about cost, charge for it. And if you do, charge everyone, not just perp and lifetime license holders. How ever you want to do it, I'm sure no one would complain. $10 per year provides an access key for every form license, $5 per year per access key, etc... what ever it is, I'm sure no one would mind. But if you want to have everyone use it, it has to be dirt cheap. You want everyone to use it, but excluding lifetime/perp license holders does not do that. It just pisses them off, and they refuse to use the service.

Be fair accross the board. That's all I ask.

I don't have a perpetual license, but I also agree with this.

As an active Lifetime License holder.

If I want to add the IP.Blog,IP.Gallery,IP.Downloads systems I pay a yearly fee for them (I have active blog/gallery licenses).

If I want to remove the footer copyright I make a one-off payment (currently considering).

If I want to use the new spam service... my "Lifetime License" is effectively ruled null and void?

I would happily pay a small additional fee (as I do with the other add-ons), but essentially I'm being asked to pay for another full license. Hello, I have one.

Am I missing something or is this a financially motivated drive to force Lifetime License holders into regular payments.

Sorry for opening the other topic, didn't notice this one.

For me, it's not about the money. It's about principle and respecting the core of your customer base that made you what you are today. I've been keeping an active support license pretty much since I got the perpetual license and in all that time I'm not sure if I put in more than 1-2 tickets (we're talking years here). The only reason I've kept it going is to support IPS and their products. I don't really need the support part (both the perpetual and lifetime license have lifetime downloads anyway). I can understand your point of view on this, but for me it just seems you're money hungry. I can understand not offering it to people without active support but this is just not very well thought out.

The costs you mentioned are there and I understand that. However, I doubt the cost is so large that you have to force your old time customers who supported you in the beginning out of their licenses for an additional $20/yr. Without us old customers you would not be where you are today. Also, these old licenses haven't been available for purchase for a very long time now. You should be treating our support licenses the same as you treat regular support licenses. We're getting the shaft here because we support you earlier than other people did.

Alternatively (if it was really about the money), you could have simply given us an option to keep our licenses but pay $50/yr instead of $30/yr for these additional benefits. Call it an "extended support level" or something. You haven't done that either. The only conclusion one can be make is that you want to force people out of their old licenses and get even more money out of them. I find this incredibly disappointing.

You've seriously tarnished your reputation here in my eyes.

I will not be renewing my support this year.

I don't have a perpetual license, but I also agree with this.

I don't have a perpetual license, but I also agree with this.

I don't have a perpetual license, but I also agree with this.

I don't have a perpetual license, but I also agree with this.

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.

Of course you did. Once you start a public rant that compares us to Nazis, the best course of action is to keep quiet on any details that back up your complaint. ;)

Regardless, I see no way to move foward and will lock this topic. I have nothing further to say either publicly or via PMs. Jawohl

Since in the announcement nothing is mentioned about that I'll it here: is there any way for us forum admins with an active license to ask for the removal of an address/IP from the spam list if a certain data is marked wrongly as spam?

I'm sure there is a way (maybe opening a ticket) but a fast way to report such things is needed when a lot of people will use this system after the release :)



A good idea indeed :thumbsup: