We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
Nemo's Ideas and Suggestions; Version 2.0
Topic Started: Jul 11 2011, 04:23 PM (1,392 Views)
Nemomon
Member Avatar
My dad's a soldier blue I'll be a soldier too
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Maximum member title length
Minimum postcount needed to edit custom title


Once it is MEMBER title, and once it is CUSTOM title.

I would suggest changing the first one into "custom" too: Maximum custom title length
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DaPizzaMan-ZNS
Member
[ *  * ]
I agree. Custom sounds better and makes more sense than member.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Geoffrey-ZNS
Member Avatar
I want you for worse or for better
[ *  *  *  * ]
Either would be fine, as long as it's consistent in each area.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nicolas
Member Avatar
"PLES RING IF AN RNSER IS REQIRD."

I think that the difference is this:
"Maximum member title length"
That is what it says. The maximum length of all member titles. Including the ones you set in the "Titles" area.

"Minimum postcount needed to edit[or create, I suppose] custom title"
This is the postcount required to change the default titles the admin creates, and make them custom for a user's account. :)

So one is defining the entire set of "member titles" - whereas the other only effects the customization of said titles.

Given that logic, I really don't think that this is a big deal in the slightest or really a "mistake" at all.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nemomon
Member Avatar
My dad's a soldier blue I'll be a soldier too
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I'm aware that such a script already exist, still I think that it should be an original feature.

Shoutbox archive can only storage max 10 pages of shouts. All that shouts are publicy visible, even if shoutbox is disabled. Also all the users are already able to delete their own shouts (that should be Admin controlled feature).

Example:
Quote:
 
User_1: Hey, I need to download pirated inDesign, can any of you share with me a link to it? (X)
User_2: Sure, wait a sec.
User_2: There it is: *insert download link here*
User_1: Thanks a lot! Hey, let's delete all the shouts, so no one from Admins will know about link. (X)


===

There should be a hidden topic, where all the shouts would be stored, no matter if user or Staff Member will delete something. It can be located in Trash Can or separate category/forum. Permissions to see it (as well as to see Trash Can btw...) shoould be given through Forum Access Masks, like for example now ShoutBox permissions are generated. These shouts may increase boards total post count (because users also may go and talk aexactly same thing in topics).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DaPizzaMan-ZNS
Member
[ *  * ]
I definitely agree. It's the same as trashing topics/posts.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pete B
Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
It's a good idea, but I don't think people would spam 10 pages of shouts to hide something like an illegal download link. Why not just PM it?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nicolas
Member Avatar
"PLES RING IF AN RNSER IS REQIRD."

I think Nemo's example there, Pete, was about the user's ability to delete their own shouts with no admin control on the feature, or any backups of what was said.

Regardless, I think that several of the points you've made are fair, Nemo. :)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nemomon
Member Avatar
My dad's a soldier blue I'll be a soldier too
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
They won't spam 10 pages of shouts to hide something - they just will delete their shouts. The point is that while public archive, available to all Members, still can be limited only to 10 pages, that Staff-Archive will storage all the shouts no matter of the date. If user will violate board Rules, Staff will have a hard proof of that violation and they will be able to keep it.

PMs are out of question because they still can be readable (in fact only in Premium) and also can be reported. Better is quickly ask in Shoutbox and then quickly delete the shout (when any one will respond) than risking sending a PM to wrong person.

Also that topic-like Archive would be good for example to know who and how much is using the Shoutbox, like "Who posted in: ShoutBox shouts storage"
Edited by Nemomon, Jul 14 2011, 02:17 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nemomon
Member Avatar
My dad's a soldier blue I'll be a soldier too
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I finally finished my work, so I have some free days to spam here.

Unfortunately I found that it is difficult to use IF/ZB Documentation. Mostly because it is IF & ZB wiki. A lot of times it happens that its search feature finds results for ZetaBoards, while I was searching for article regarding InvisionFree, and vice versa.

I think that Zathyus Networks should have two separate wikis, one for InvisionFree, and one for ZetaBoards. It is a real nightmare when I am searching for ZetaBoards term, and all the results are for InvisionFree :arr:

Optionally every article there should be doubled - one for ZetaBoards, and its alternative version for InvisionFree - and at the bottom of every article should be a link to its alternate version. So even if search feature will show me results only about one host, I quickly will be able to access similar article about the other host.

Not to mention that this small thing will help newbies in InvisionFree/ZetaBoards a lot.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Geoffrey-ZNS
Member Avatar
I want you for worse or for better
[ *  *  *  * ]
I think two seperate wikis would be the way to go. IF and ZB are both different softwares and there's no reason they have to be combined. Just because they are run by the same person, that doesn't mean they're similar enough to share a documentation.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BrendanR
Member
[ *  *  * ]
I agree that two wikis should be made. Or, you could add the option to search for either IF articles or ZB articles, similar to ZNR database search.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Helena
Member Avatar
M is for Mod

This was a good issue to highlight, Nemomon. I've found the same frustration when using the wiki, and I'm not a newbie to either service. If not two separate documentation areas, maybe the search results could be separated somehow.l
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nemomon
Member Avatar
My dad's a soldier blue I'll be a soldier too
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Why so official, Helena :unsure:? I am (little) Nemo ^_^.

Also that idea about links to alternate service at the bottom of every article may be considered. It for sure won't hurt, but sometimes may help.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Moonface
Member Avatar


I agree something to split searches out so results aren't mixed is a good idea. I've searched for InvisionFree documentations before when giving support and ended up getting a ZetaBoards one, and almost gave the wrong support the first time it happened as I didn't expect it but managed to notice at the last moment when going back to get a link inside the documentation I was reading. And I had gone to the IF Docs to perform the search, so even trying to go to separate home pages for the documentations doesn't seem to do much of anything. :/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Service Discussion and Feedback · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1