• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Our solution was to remove the delete option entirely and tell mods to move the topics to the trash (for the few things that we didn't want to use "hide" for instead).
  2. What I really miss is stemming. When we ran a Sphinx server in 3.x we had stemming turned on, which greatly improved search result quality. We experimented with both a standard English morphology as well as Soundex and Metaphone. I'd really have preferred even better Sphinx integration because I would also like to weight results so that a title hit was better than a post content hit, etc. People are used to Google-quality results, and a fulltext search just doesn't give that.
  3. I also said I thought you should outsource it If you can do it properly for a few thousand, PM me...
  4. Rumor has it they had a few other things the were working on during that upgrade What would "right" look like? Sphinx, for example, is actually a very large, complex piece of software on its own. We can't really expect Invision to develop something like that. Search is hard! Invision isn't going to be able to just snap their fingers and get it done right: ideally, they need to outsource it, the same way they outsourced the editor. The trouble is, who do you outsource to? Invision believes, probably correctly, that the majority of their user base doesn't need anything more advanced than fulltext. I'd happily pay thousands of dollars for an effective solution, but there's no one to give the money to!
  5. The reality is that searching is very hard to do well. MySQL fulltext searching is very poor, but Sphinx requires a server and maintenance of code linking to it. Plus, if you want to take advantage of all of the features Sphinx offers you have to actually code them into your interface. Although Invision nominally supported Sphinx in previous versions, they never exposed the real strengths of Sphinx, and only used it as a faster, more efficient alternative to Fulltext, but with the same feature set. This has to do a lot with their clientele, most of whom don't need a particularly powerful search engine because they aren't housing information, they are simply discussing things "in the moment." Some of us, however, see one of our primary purposes as the archival and retrieval of information! So we seek other solutions. In 4.1 we've found that using a Google Custom Search Engine gives us the highest quality results (after all, Google seems to know what they are doing when it comes to search!), with the major caveat that the returned results are paginated, and you don't get linked directly to individual posts. We considered this to be an acceptable tradeoff. DawPi developed an excellent plugin for us that integrates the CSE directly into the normal interface, so it is totally non-intrusive to my members.
  6. I think you are using a very specific definition of "archive" here, which seems to be synonymous with "not valuable anymore, but not quite worth deleting." To me, "archive" means "still valuable, but not changing anymore."
  7. I just checked, and my results come back with the interface in English, no matter what language setting I choose.
  8. A workaround may be to use a Google Custom Search engine. DawPi developed a plugin to integrate directly into your board.
  9. The author of the Automation Rules app, @Kevin Carwile, came up with a way of handling it by attaching an extra piece of data to each member that tracks whether the group change has occurred or not, so maybe you can do something like that (or just piggyback on AR).
  10. I wonder if this is something that could be done easily with Automation Rules. Has anyone tried that?
  11. It's probably not high on the list of features since there's an inexpensive mod that adds it: My recollection is that 4.2 is going to focus on "Member Engagement" so maybe this counts as that, though?
  12. @Jimmy Gavekort -- We use the "Rules" plugin to do this automatically. The Lite version is even free.
  13. My members love this plugin, particularly now that I can put it in the sidebar. Of course, since they love it they have ideas for how to make it even better -- here are a couple of suggestions from them: They would prefer that the Alt text when you hover over the image be the name of the discussion topic, rather than just "Go to post". They want more! A way to create a whole page of these, letting them go back even further in time. I know, that's a much bigger task (probably an app, not a plugin).
  14. This would be great: it could work sort of like PowerPoint's "Master" template, that then gets overridden when needed by the sub-templates.
  15. We have a lot of forums, but overall they can be grouped into a small number of categories: in our case public, all staff, and upper management. Every single forum in each of these categories has the same basic settings and permissions. As Invision continually adds new features, it would be nice to be able to edit entire groups of forums at once to bulk-modify the various settings. This could be done via a checkbox-type multiple-selection interface, or even better, by allowing "forums groups" to be defined that could be managed in the same way member groups are.