Forum restrictions for new members

[King Spew]

with a bit of html trickery....can we make each forum FAQ thread title be the color red AND "flashing"? Once opened, a user would have the option to turn off the flashing......

[zikzak]

How about giving the CSS class "stickyprefix" a light yellow background? Emphasis on light. Something like #ffff99 seems like it might stand out without being super obnoxious.

[atakdog]

Originally Posted by zikzak

How many times do new users need to completely overlook the stickies before it dawns on people that there might be something about them that leads to their being overlooked

This part is correct. When many users keep making the same mistake (here, overlooking stickies) on a website, then the problem is the website's design.

Unfortunately, as bobo implies, there isn't an obvious solution (so the sentence I omitted from the above post isn't correct); there may be no solution at all. People are inured to everything on a web page that is designed to make it prominent, simply because so many things that are designed to be prominent turn out to be things that most users will want to ignore. So this problem will likely never go away.

Doesn't mean we cant laugh a little at people who ignore the stickies, but maybe keeping it to a dull roar would be appropriate.

[gregorio]

Would this work?

We have one forum on our site that restricts posting based on a promotion system. What we are trying to do is show a custom permission error message to the usergroup that is restricted from posting in that forum if they try to post.

Is this possible? I looked at the STANDARD_ERROR template but can't really make heads or tails on what I would need to do this.

I am trying to something along the lines of...

1) if is a member of usergroup 1
2) if the forum is forum x
3) if the member of usergroup 1 tries to post in forum x, then a custom error message saying why they are unable to post in forum x.

Thank you for any help you can provide!

If you look at newreply.php around line 110, there's the newreply_start hook location, and right after that it does some permission checks and prints error messages. So if you create a plugin using that hook location and do you own checks, I think you should be able to do whatever you want for an error message. Same with newthread.php (the but hook is newthread_start).

So for instance you could make a plugin using newreply_start and do something like:


Block Disabled: (Update License Status) though2p2 admins might be able to read this based on their VB license?

 Suspended or Unlicensed Members Cannot View Code.

where 'customerror' is a custom phrase you created (that you can name whatever you want, of course).

ETA: You'd also need a second plugin using newthread_start to handle new threads. The code should be the same, except using $foruminfo['forumid'] in place of $threadinfo['forumid'].

http://www.vbulletin.org/forum/showthread.php?t=256229

Or this mod?

Joe, any way to make an option to allow them to view [a forum] but if they try to START a thread they get the message?

For instance, on my board in order to start a For Sale thread, you have to be a member for 6 months or have a certain number of posts, then you get promoted to another user group that has thread starting privileges for For Sale...or if they buy a Paid Subscription it opens it up. Right now they just don't read the damn threads that say they need to have those requirements and then complain elsewhere.

Actually looking at the code for this mod I think it might well work like that as is. It should override any "no permission" error in a forum whether it is due to trying to read the forum or trying to post in the forum- try it- I think it should work as you want.

http://www.qapla.com/mods/showthread...acom-Exclusive

[AlligatorBloodFTW]

Originally Posted by mario38

I should have folded, I should have raised, I should of called.

why did you type it right the first two times but wrong the third time?

[mario38]

Originally Posted by AlligatorBloodFTW

why did you type it right the first two times but wrong the third time?

Like I said, hindsight is 20/20.

[mario38]

I agree with some of the comments in this thread with respect to the confusing user interface. For example, I was reading the Internet Poker forum and there are 4 stickies at the start of the forum that may or may not contain rules relevant to the forum. Plus, there is a thread in the forum with its own set of rules specific to that thread.

Now maybe what I do not fully appreciate is all the problems this type of website has experienced in the past with respect to less than honest members. I love the game of poker, but being gambling related, the activity does not always attract the best type of persons.

Good luck.

[gambit8888]

Originally Posted by mario38

I agree with some of the comments in this thread with respect to the confusing user interface. For example, I was reading the Internet Poker forum and there are 4 stickies at the start of the forum that may or may not contain rules relevant to the forum. Plus, there is a thread in the forum with its own set of rules specific to that thread.

Now maybe what I do not fully appreciate is all the problems this type of website has experienced in the past with respect to less than honest members. I love the game of poker, but being gambling related, the activity does not always attract the best type of persons.

Good luck.

You can find the answer to this real easy you know?

[mario38]

Originally Posted by gambit8888

You can find the answer to this real easy you know?

I do not understand. Answer to what? I did not pose a question, only a comment.

[AlligatorBloodFTW]

look at the part he bolded. he was referring to you not knowing whether or not the stickies contained rules.

[Bobo Fett]

A couple of interesting suggestions here which I'll pass along. Unfortunately, I think this would be fairly low-priority for a very busy office, but it's worth a mention at least.

Thanks!

[mcgruff22]

It's not that we don't see the stickies, it's just rules are boring. Who has time for that ****

[Ce1ska]

New members should be restricted from posting IMO

[Wilbury Twist]

Originally Posted by Ce1ska

New members should be restricted from posting IMO

I wouldn't mind seeing a policy put in place at News, Views & Gossip under which new posters may not start a new thread unless a mod approves it. A few thoughts about this:

1. The "new poster" shall be defined as someone who had created his/her account in the previous 90 days, or who has fewer than 50 posts.

2. The reason I'd like a mod to be able to approve a thread created by the definition is (1) is that every now and then, a new poster comes in with some important or critical information (e.g. a brainwashdodo type).

3. For at least the next few months, concessions can be made for someone who had to create a new account in the wake of the security breach. I understand that a few veteran members had forgotten their old passwords and now post under new screen names. I would not want to restrict these people.

As has been stated above, many forum sections already have restrictions. Based on the sensitivity or incendiary nature of certain poker news -- e.g. Full Tilt payouts -- I think it would be appropriate to extend this to NVG. The number of horrible new threads seems to spike when bigger poker-related news hits.

Thanks for the consideration.

[Bobo Fett]

Originally Posted by Wilbury Twist

As has been stated above, many forum sections already have restrictions. Based on the sensitivity or incendiary nature of certain poker news -- e.g. Full Tilt payouts -- I think it would be appropriate to extend this to NVG. The number of horrible new threads seems to spike when bigger poker-related news hits.

Just to clarify, the number of forums where the creation of new threads is restricted in some way by the forum software because of anything to do with trying to improve the quality of threads being started - two, at most. I don't know how selective EDF is these days. The other would be Poker Headlines, an offshoot of NVG designed with your concerns in mind.