Plugin: Discussion Inserts - Insert HTML based on Discussion ID
@hgtonight and I just finished a first version of "Discussion Inserts" that allows you to add custom HTML after the initial post of a specific discussion.
It's for Vanilla 184.108.40.206 and Vanilla 2.1+
It can be helpfull if you want to adress visitors or users of a different discussions with special information. For example: Add a link to the registration ("Want to join this discussion? Register here!") or place a advertising banner (lead generation for example). There are numerous ideas to use it. Inserts are based on the discussion ID (you should find in the URL of your discussion) and can have a separate appearance on desktop or mobile.
I'd like to hear your feedback technically, ideas for further development and what you use it for in your community.
We have some ideas on the table, but let's see if the plugin is of use for you and we can consider on further development.
- VanillaAPP | iOS & Android App for Vanilla - White label app for Vanilla Forums OS
- VanillaSkins | Plugins, Themes, Graphics and Custom Development for Vanilla
As I mentioned in the original discussion, I would have written it quite differently and kept it much simpler (I would not have used a separate table for them, as I don't see the need for that), therefore I won't be able to give much feedback without risking to sound like "rewrite it".
I also disagree with having separate contents for desktop and mobile. Content should be the same and appearance should be handled by the theme.
Anyway, as they say, there are many ways to skin a cat. If I will need this functionality, I will probably write my own solution.
My shop | About Me
Yep, i'd also liked they way you would implement it. But for example in my need it's important to not integrate it in the usual comment table as we are also using the Tapatalk App and this could have broken the functionality. 2nd is that having two different appearances was a decision with Google Page Speed in mind (and you regulary would use this plugin on high ranking discussions) where for example adding 2 JPGs with quite some KBs and hiding the one or the other (desktop/mobile) via CSS would just add some weight that is not needed and will likely drop you rank.
BUT if you just add an insert to the desktop field, you can still work it through themeing, so both is possible.
I doubt it would have broken it. A comment is a comment, it would blend in quite smoothly.
All the guidelines I follow strongly push in the direction of never creating separate sites for desktop and mobile. A few weeks ago I helped a company revisiting their website, which large images unsuitable for mobile, without adding code conditionals and rendering different sites. Ranking increased, and the CSS changes were negligible. Besides, if you think that the JPGs are too large for mobiles... Don't use them!
If a service requires two different scripts for desktop and mobile, then the service is flawed. It may be popular, necessary, important, but still flawed. The real way to go is fixing the service (I can be a real PITA for service providers when I spot these design issues).
Bottom line, the requirements you list are highly specific to your situation, and I can understand that the adopted solution covers them. It just seems overkill to me, based on what we would need. The important thing is that it works for you, after all it was a custom project.
My shop | About Me
Before fixing the biggest ad-networks and media agencies in the world i'd rather consider making an optional work around in a small plugin. I totally understand you technically, but ad companies do really work different.
That's why it's a constant fight between me and them. Also, as a supporter of any service that blocks ads, I'm not one of their best friends anyway.
More off topic
This reminds me of a hilarious GIF I spotted some time ago. The caption was something like "my reaction when they tell me not to use AdBlock because it hurts the content creator":
My shop | About Me
that can be phase 2. STABLE
I may not provide the completed solution you might desire, but I do try to provide honest suggestions to help you solve your issue.
Blocking ads not selectivly is unfair to the people who need to make a living of good things out of it. I run several websites where people who are living in remote areas are empowered through communities and information they give to each other. This service undertakes a lot of work. If everyone would block ads no one would afford making such a community. I'm sure you drink beer and pay for it (probably from an international company), and i guess you read newspapers online (but you don't pay for it, probably a local company). I'm ok with your perspective regarding multinational and mostly corrupt companies, but not regarding small publisher who try to make a difference in the sell-out internet.
Thats the hell of a OT.