Will IPB 3.0 have normal group managing or we will still have to use clans mod ?

there is a mod from compguy11.com that allows to create groups and users can join this groups and so on. phpbb and vb have this functionality in base distributive will you add this functions to 3rd version ?

IPB has normal usergroup managing. o.o

He means social groups for others to create.. lemme get an example.

http://www.gunzfactor.com/forums/groups/ (not sure if its viewable for unregistered).

He's not talking about social groups as far as I can tell, he's talking about joinable groups.

+1 for joinable groups, -1 for social groups.

I recall Matt saying in the sale's question forum (when there was one, a while back), something this (though again alot happens in (x) years!) would be in IPB 3. -- joinable groups that is.

According to Matts blog entry about IP.Board not trying to be a social-networking script, but a forum means I don't think this is in IP.Board 3

Yeah, I think it's clear social groups aren't a feature (Matt made that pretty clear), but joinable usergroups are a completely different thing, and really they have a major purpose, and that's making it so members can access restricted forums and get permissions without pestering an admin.

yes that is exactly what it is and vb and other forum software do use this feature, which I think is brillient and could really be effective in IPB. It's a way to allow users to join groups themselves as set by the forum admin. So if one wants to join a group called 'Premium Members' which would allow them access to certain forums after reaching 500 posts not allowable to Standard Members they could join this group and be approved by a Moderator or be auto-approved based on the admin's setting. This is a very nice way to upgrade members without having to manually switch them to another group as this would do it upon approval automaticly.

Definately a needed feature! +1

ipb already has the feature to "promote" and "demote" members based on how many posts they have made. Also joinable groups imo don't seem like a good idea i just can't see a point in them and believe this control shouldn't be given to the members anyway.

+1 for joinable Groups in IPB 3.0

I can see the benefits of it!

I doubt this will be in IP.Board3 unless its already in it now, as it is feature-locked. Might need to be a suggestion for 3.1

Joinable groups would be a good thing, but only if the admin had the option to turn it on or off on a per usergroup basis.

I am aware of the promote and demote members thing in IPB.

Joinable groups work quite qwell. The control is by the Admin's and Moderated by Moderators. Members are allowed to seek application to join a group which must be approved by a Moderator. In some cases approval may not be needed but the abillity is there as per other forum softwaere and Modifications.

If you don't want it than don't use it...but I still think it should be available since the demand for it far exceeds those who oppose it.



That's a built in feature in other boards and modifications. Of course the Admin would need to have that option.

You don't actually know that.

TBH I'm not sure of my feelings on all this social networking + forums stuff... on one hand I don't think user join-able groups is a terrible idea as it allows members of the community to meet others with similar interests... but on the other hand it encourages segregation throughout the community based on what groups people are in and results in people being content with not going out of their little shells to interact with others.

I'm so indecisive =o

They have a purpose, and that purpose is to maker things easier on the admin, for example, if you have a section for members above a certain age, currently you'd have to manually add that usergroup to their account, and ONLY admins could do such, with joinable groups any group leader can add them, making it easier on admins.



I think you're also thinking of social groups... because of course joinable groups would have such a setting.



With all the +1s in this thread I think it's pretty clear.



Once again, it's not social groups, it's joinable user groups, the idea isn't like clubs at all and segregation isn't at all a part of it, it's about allowing users an easier way to be put in to certain groups, given access to certain forums, and given certain permissions. It's not social networking at all, and it's a feature on almost all the other major forum software already.

Ah, I skipped a bunch of replies and assumed a lot and ended up making an ass of myself again

It's still iffy and would have to be done a certain way. I like the idea of allowing people to manage user groups (in that they can apply and remove ONLY the groups(s) they're allowed to manage, set by the admin in ACP)... I actually have an independent utility that does this for my forum.

However, the OP has me think it IS social groups because people can create them and join them. No, people shouldn't be able to create their own groups and no, people shouldn't be able to "join" groups, only have the person who manages the group give them the group.



Right, even if we ignore the fact that it's only three +1's, a bunch of neutrals and a bunch of negatives, what makes you think the opinions here constitute the thoughts of the 4,162 people in the customers group on this forum?

And more than that since there are people here, who have a license, but have not renewed support or the license itself (like myself... I only renewed it for access to articles and downloads related to IP.Board 3 when it gets released.). Then there are board administrators and moderators who come here to read up on the latest news, but don't have a license themselves...

Exactly. No one should presume to make any guesses about what the majority of IPS's customers want. A couple people supporting a topic like this, even a half dozen similar topics, doesn't mean that it's a feature most people want. IPS has said most of their clients don't install any mods at all, wouldn't that by itself mean most people don't actually need this feature?

Don't get me wrong, this is actually something that comes up pretty regularly, so obviously there is a fairly significant base of folks out there who'd want this. I just think it's silly to use the opinions of a handful of people who responded to a topic as an indication that the majority of the client base wants that feature added.

Last time I saw a forum do joinable groups, it was a failure. No real discussion happened in the forums. I do not concider this something worth having in the main code.

Now... A member group indicator would... It's one of the more useful functions...

Clubs and social groups may do that, but joinable usergroups won't unless you either use them for clubs, or in a really messed up way (Group to view every forum or something similar)

Try subscription. It is more advance system in IPB, compare to others.

RTFM for God sake!

Go take a look at TAZ (The Admin Zone)

Most of the groups don't give you access to any additional forums, they just show your interest in a specific topic (in their case different forum software) in your member profile (eg: My profile there and also as a tag under your username in posts.

This is all done by the user, save for a select few groups that need a group leader approval to join, and requires no interaction from the admin.


+1 from me as well.

That's social groups, which is different. The OP is specifically stating they aren't looking for this sort of thing.

Let me just state right now that while we have discussed internally group enhancements (along the lines of both joinable and social groups) it takes a lot of effort to "get it right". There have to be proper administrator controls, proper front-end moderation controls for group managers, ability to make new users group managers, and then there has to be functionality useful enough for this sort of thing.

This functionality will not be in 3.0, however it is something on drawing board that we come back to and are still discussing. That is to say, it may make it into a future release, it just won't be in the next release.

Aside from the Launch Team, Exchange, and Big-Boards groups they're all just aesthetic, while that idea works for TAZ, most forums wouldn't have a use for groups that are solely aesthetic.





Actually TAZ uses joinable groups for what nzeroesc mentioned, each has it's own color and represents a forum software, IPB is blue, phpBB is yellow, vBulletin is a dark purple/blue and so on, they serve no functions other than allowing users to show what software they use, there's no real social aspect about it, it just says that this member uses this software.





Yeah, I actually agree, it's better to add a thought out feature than just tack crap on like some software does.

Good to hear it may be added eventually.

How does IPB 3 handle secondary groups? I remember trying to write a modification for this a while back and the implementation was, in my opinion rather clunky. Secondary groups are stored in a comma-delimited string in the members table in IPB 2.x, if I remember correctly.

They'd probably still be in a comma-delimited string

+1

In my forum this could be useful with my site being related to a band groups could be created to show people who are attending a certain concert on x date.

Hopefully v 3 will have no comma separated strings in the database.

Err... I think that maybe a long shot. How else do you propose handling secondary groups?

With a linking table.

+1 from me also on the social and joinable groups. You can't get more sociable than a community, and a message board is a community.
This was recognised when Invision realised the social importance of the member profiles and improved them accordingly, member groups is a natural step in the same direction.
I really think improved 'social' options and functionality are a must and natural progression for IPB3.0.

The trend is increasingly in the direction of social networking. It is a characteristic of all known products. IPB 3.0 may be only the beginning like this, there is in this area needs to be done.

What's so bad about comma separated strings?
If they used linking tables for everything that is comma-separated or serialised, the database would be a mess.

No, it wouldn't.

Let me rephrase that: upgrading would be a mess. Especially as it's so critical to get right (IT Crowd reference: "You don't want to end up in the middle of invalid memory!") and such a difficult thing to test - the only way to test it would be to create a test site filled with fake data, logging the way everything should be, running the upgrader and checking it all converted properly; and doing that is going to be very easy to make a mistake, or miss something. Unless there is some major compelling reason that they should never be used that I'm not aware of (if there is, please share: You didn't say why comma separated strings are so bad) I'd much rather know that the upgrader isn't going to be undertaking database structure changes for the sake of it.

I'll say right now, while "proper database design theory" calls for no comma-separated strings, in reality it's not always easy or the most efficient way. While we recognize that some areas of the database design can *always* be improved, I'll state right now that it's not likely IPB3 will have no comma-separated strings in the database.

such as polls

I agree, this would be a great feature for my site as we have a lot of car clubs who would find this very useful. I also think it would go a long way in helping the forum admins delete unused forums and allow enthusiastic members to instead create a group and promote it. For example, I could get rid of all my regional and dead forums and focus on the ones which are active. When the time is right, a member could just create a group for their area instead of having a regional forum, or countless regional sub forums for each car club in that region. I have seen other car forums using this feature with great success on V-Bulletin. Social networks and groups seem to be the wave of the future and I hope IPB will catch up and help us compete with V-bulletin forums. Right now it seems like my forum software is dated and stuck in the pre-social networking era, while all the other forums are zooming into the future. I can understand that not all sites would benefit from this, but there are some which would benefit greatly. Either way, I purchased IP Blob, Gallery, and Board and have been using it since 2004, so I am not going anywhere, but I do wish I was able to compete with the car forums who are using the v-bulletin offered features.

+1 for joinable groups..
Would be really awesome to have!
My forum is splitted in "two" parts, and it would be so nice, if one of my mods, could lead the forum, and add/remove mods for his forums.. without i had to give him acp rights.. i know i can do restrictions, but i don't want him to be able to change to other groups, or change user-settings etc..