Post by: live627 on April 5th, 2012, 07:21 AM
 |
 |
User details:
- Uses board permission too allow/deny users the ability too invite members to a topic. Note that guests cannot do this.
- Sidebar block for members who are invited to topic
Post by: Nao on April 5th, 2012, 07:54 AM
Although I agree that if people are going to create a group just for one topic it's a bit silly, but at least its faster... Or is it.
Can you share your code in private? I'm interested in seeing your implementation. As you know I got obsessed with topic privacy shortly before we went live and I'm still hurt I didn't manage to write a ui timely enough. To me, privacy is the most critical feature to complete before going alpha. The rest can 'wait' I think.
Post by: live627 on April 5th, 2012, 08:02 AM
Posted: April 5th, 2012, 07:58 AM
Done. :)
Post by: Nao on April 5th, 2012, 08:02 AM
Post by: MultiformeIngegno on April 5th, 2012, 10:23 AM
This is really useful, groups are ok but really limited. :)
Post by: Arantor on April 5th, 2012, 10:45 AM
Finally! :D
This is really useful, groups are ok but really limited. :)
Post by: Nao on April 5th, 2012, 02:04 PM
Finally! :D
This is really useful, groups are ok but really limited. :)
Posted: April 5th, 2012, 02:02 PM
BTW, just to give some random statistics... Over at Noisen, there's only one blog author who ever used topic privacy (ever!), apart from me. And it does have the 'Friends' privacy setting that is more 'practical' to use than Wedge's. Even then, nope, nobody will use it... Probably because they generally don't speak about themselves except by PM, where they know for 'sure' that it's fine to write anything. Still... It's probably a feature that I'm more obsessive about, than anyone else combined. Lol.
Post by: MultiformeIngegno on April 5th, 2012, 04:42 PM
And you didn't want to say this earlier because...?Quote from MultiformeIngegno on April 5th, 2012, 10:23 AM Finally! :D
This is really useful, groups are ok but really limited. :)
I try to do my best and read and partecipate as much as I can though ;)
Post by: live627 on April 6th, 2012, 12:09 AM
groups are ok but really limited
Post by: MultiformeIngegno on April 6th, 2012, 11:20 AM
Care too say why?Quote groups are ok but really limited
Post by: Arantor on April 6th, 2012, 01:04 PM
(The reason I was pissy earlier in this thread is that we discussed it for days and days and this wasn't brought up before)
Post by: MultiformeIngegno on April 6th, 2012, 01:47 PM
And what happens if you create a contact list for all your friends, what then? Isn't that *exactly* when you would use groups?
Of course you can create groups but there's no need to do that just to have permissions for a single topic/board/media/etc..
It's more polish if permissions are applied to the single elements. Maybe groups can remain, and single permissions are added to those..
(The reason I was pissy earlier in this thread is that we discussed it for days and days and this wasn't brought up before)
Post by: Arantor on April 6th, 2012, 01:52 PM
Post by: godboko71 on April 6th, 2012, 11:28 PM
Post by: MultiformeIngegno on April 6th, 2012, 11:51 PM
I love groups I hardly ever set privacy to something different then any groups I would set up. For the few times I might... I would just make a new group with the new list of users.
http://ticker.ttsh.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/dvp-open.jpg
Or remote controls like this:
http://[url][url][url]http://ii.alatest.com/product/full/8/8/JUmbo-Universal-Remote-Control-0.jpg[/url][/url][/url]
Then someone rethought the way they was built.
You cannot think "I always did this, so everyone should do this", or "I always did that, so it won't change ever"....
Post by: Arantor on April 6th, 2012, 11:57 PM
Here's the thing: things sometimes stay as they are because no-one thought to improve them, and sometimes they stay as they are because it's reasonably optimised as it is.
Not everyone wants a touchscreen phone, I don't own one, I own a smartphone with basic keys on it, but I know plenty of people who actively use a Blackberry for that reason.
You know what's really weird though? Google+ works how we're leaning towards - you create circles for things, which is a form of groups, and control which groups see content. In fact, if you look at the way things are, it's even closer a model to what G+ does than anything else, but I guess that's wrong and we should implement purely for the lowest common denominator, despite it not being the general baseline that works best? (Specifying a list of names for each topic is pointless, especially if it's the same list of names each time. Surely then a group would be a FAR better solution?)
Post by: godboko71 on April 7th, 2012, 12:21 AM
PS: I have no power here so me saying I love groups in no way means things will not change. I just love the power they give me, I use them anywhere I can it saves me so much time and I am less inclined to forget someone them if I have to include them individuality. Not to say that functionality would not be useful every once in awhile.
Post by: MultiformeIngegno on April 7th, 2012, 12:22 AM
Except that there are a lot of people who actually like having a physical QWERTY keyboard on their phone, for example. Just as there are people who would actually quite welcome that.
[...]
Not everyone wants a touchscreen phone, I don't own one, I own a smartphone with basic keys on it, but I know plenty of people who actively use a Blackberry for that reason.
Compare:
http://www.mrgadget.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Logitech-Harmony-300-Universal-Remote.jpg
with
http://www.senisio.com/senisio/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/apple-remote.jpg
Here's the thing: things sometimes stay as they are because no-one thought to improve them, and sometimes they stay as they are because it's reasonably optimised as it is.
IMO the process works like this: phase 1, object is created. phase 2, object has small optimizations over and over again. phase 3, object is reinvented. phase 4, small optimizations... phase 5: reinvented.
Here's the thing: optimizations are sacred but there's a time where things need to be rethought and reinvented. Then before another rethink there need to are optimizations! :)
You know what's really weird though? Google+ works how we're leaning towards - you create circles for things, which is a form of groups, and control which groups see content. In fact, if you look at the way things are, it's even closer a model to what G+ does than anything else, but I guess that's wrong and we should implement purely for the lowest common denominator, despite it not being the general baseline that works best? (Specifying a list of names for each topic is pointless, especially if it's the same list of names each time. Surely then a group would be a FAR better solution?)
Post by: Arantor on April 7th, 2012, 12:36 AM
Here's the thing: optimizations are sacred but there's a time where things need to be rethought and reinvented. Then before another rethink there need to are optimizations!
Let me put it this way, I've been using forums for several years and I have seen a very few occasions in that time I would have liked topic access limited to a small number and in each of those cases I'd almost certainly have set a list up of contacts in advance anyway. To put something like this in the core, given that as Nao indicated, almost no-one would use it anyway and penalise all users' performance for it, is simply unacceptable.
Post by: MultiformeIngegno on April 7th, 2012, 09:42 AM
Post by: live627 on October 7th, 2012, 09:31 AM