Force user to read PM from moderator/admin
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:34 am
Force user to read PM from moderator/admin
If users have unread messages from a moderator/admin, he must read it before further usage of the board
- imkingdavid
- Registered User
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2009 12:06 pm
Re: [RFC] Force user to read PM from moderator/admin
I feel like this could interfere with board usage when it comes to a casual conversation between a user and an admin. Also, would moderators and administrators be required to drop everything and read the PM? And what happens when a user has just typed in a post and goes to submit it but is required to read an admin PM? I assume the post would be lost.
IMO this wuold be best as an extension.
IMO this wuold be best as an extension.
Re: [RFC] Force user to read PM from moderator/admin
No, thanks. Not even as an extension.
Re: [RFC] Force user to read PM from moderator/admin
not by force , i feel this is not good for forum usability
- Jessica.
- Registered User
- Posts: 144
- Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 8:17 pm
- Location: Pennsylvania, USA
- Contact:
Re: [RFC] Force user to read PM from moderator/admin
No thanks...not needed.
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:34 am
Re: [RFC] Force user to read PM from moderator/admin
I see what you mean. But I need a way to make sure that a user take action when a moderator contact him/her regards something, and not just ignore the PMimkingdavid wrote:I feel like this could interfere with board usage when it comes to a casual conversation between a user and an admin. Also, would moderators and administrators be required to drop everything and read the PM? And what happens when a user has just typed in a post and goes to submit it but is required to read an admin PM? I assume the post would be lost.
IMO this wuold be best as an extension.
Re: [RFC] Force user to read PM from moderator/admin
I don't think you can force this in any way. Every popup, notification, alarm bell etc. can be muted by simply clicking something open and than go back to the previous page. The best thing you might do is to always notify by email even when the user has disabled this. (however, this should be an extension for those who want it, not a core function).
Above message may contain errors in grammar, spelling or wrongly chosen words. This is because I'm not a native speaker. My apologies in advance.
Re: Force user to read PM from moderator/admin
There's something equivalent in IP.B. Not about PM's but about warnings.
We could take a look about how they do it and maybe do the same about warnings in phpBB.
We could also take care about what the user is submitting while the condition persists.
For example, the user tries to submit the message, but he has a warning pendent, he would see the error message and a link in the error message that would open a new tab/window with the warning that the user received. After he acknowledges it, that "block" is lifted and the user may resubmit.
Anyway, doing this block for PM's is -1, from me and for warnings (as an option when creating the warn itself) is +1 from me.
We could take a look about how they do it and maybe do the same about warnings in phpBB.
We could also take care about what the user is submitting while the condition persists.
For example, the user tries to submit the message, but he has a warning pendent, he would see the error message and a link in the error message that would open a new tab/window with the warning that the user received. After he acknowledges it, that "block" is lifted and the user may resubmit.
Anyway, doing this block for PM's is -1, from me and for warnings (as an option when creating the warn itself) is +1 from me.
- Pony99CA
- Registered User
- Posts: 986
- Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 2:35 am
- Location: Hollister, CA
- Contact:
Re: Force user to read PM from moderator/admin
Yes, addressing things with Warnings makes more sense. If it's not something that would normally get a warning, maybe we need a new "event" type (Actions?) for required things.
Alternatively, how about a new "Must Read" flag on PMs that is permission-based. The default would be off, of course. That addresses the "casual conversation" issue raised above.
As for losing posts/PMs, open the PM in a new tab/window.
But I'm not sure this is warranted in the core.
Steve
Alternatively, how about a new "Must Read" flag on PMs that is permission-based. The default would be off, of course. That addresses the "casual conversation" issue raised above.
As for losing posts/PMs, open the PM in a new tab/window.
But I'm not sure this is warranted in the core.
Steve
Silicon Valley Pocket PC (http://www.svpocketpc.com)
Creator of manage_bots and spoof_user (ask me)
Need hosting for a small forum with full cPanel & MySQL access? Contact me or PM me.
Creator of manage_bots and spoof_user (ask me)
Need hosting for a small forum with full cPanel & MySQL access? Contact me or PM me.
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:34 am
Re: Force user to read PM from moderator/admin
That I think sounds more like the right solution, but then it many should be a part of this RFC https://area51.phpbb.com/phpBB/viewtopi ... 78&t=34389Pony99CA wrote:Yes, addressing things with Warnings makes more sense. If it's not something that would normally get a warning, maybe we need a new "event" type (Actions?) for required things.brunoais wrote:There's something equivalent in IP.B. Not about PM's but about warnings.
We could take a look about how they do it and maybe do the same about warnings in phpBB.
We could also take care about what the user is submitting while the condition persists.
For example, the user tries to submit the message, but he has a warning pendent, he would see the error message and a link in the error message that would open a new tab/window with the warning that the user received. After he acknowledges it, that "block" is lifted and the user may resubmit.
Anyway, doing this block for PM's is -1, from me and for warnings (as an option when creating the warn itself) is +1 from me.
Steve