Whisper improvement

TomTester

Off-topic (yes, this was about a great add-on Polo proposed and Pol implemented): ANYTHING stored in the database can be read by the admin.

Off-off-topic: W. I just blinked and rubbed my eyes, did you really dare write:

W: I can't believe you actually said and believe that.[...] I'm a little more honest with my people than that, I give them the whole story, that's why I'm trusted.

I really do need that "truly hide this user" add-on... Pol... Are you busy? (I was going to Whisper this to you W. but why whisper when I can shout)

Wanderer

Tommy boy you are a dick.

All I said was, telling people to simply trust you is not security. What's wrong with that or is something else stuck in your craw?

No, not everyone is stupider than me, but you obviously think you are, I do.

No, I never "backtrack" when I am right. When I am wrong or unsure I shut my mouth, try it.

TomTester

@All: Wanderer refers to an inappropriate line I wrote but removed (apparently while he formulated his response).

MySchizoBuddy

What about discussions started as whispers those are same as PM's the admin will have to click on it to read it. inbetween discussions perhaps a warning to the admin that the post is a whisper and he/she should not be reading it and rather skip to the next unwhispered comment. that way the admin won't accidently read them. Or perhaps for admins the whisper appears collapsed and he/she will have to deliberately expand it. which should make it similar to PM's where the admin has to delibrately go out of his/her way to read private content.

MySchizoBuddy

to Big W and Tommy boy use whispers next time

TomTester

Schiz, I just discovered I can actually edit a posted comment and turn it into a whisper as
an afterthought. Way Cool! Anyway, we've just proven (in public) there's a really good
use for whispers :-) This concludes our demonstration.

Re: topic of admin & privacy:
As my good friend W. already indicated there is no privacy on-line (email servers, IP addresses,
cookies, etc.) so why expect it in whispers on a bulletin board?

IMHO it's better to educate people on this fact than to let them assume privacy. I also do not
see the point why admins cannot read whispers or PMs on a board if needed (think pervs,
stalkers etc. etc.)

Wanderer

 Quote: TomTester  IMHO it's better to educate people on this fact than to let them assume privacy.
And that sir, (he says adjusting his halo) is exactly what I said about 12 comments back. Amen.

Minisweeper

The thing is, the main benefit of whispers is that they allow people to write things to certain people which would otherwise unnecessarily clutter up the discussion for others. Most the whispers I write are hardly private, there's just no need for anyone else to waste their time reading them. If they chose to I wouldnt be particularly bothered. If i wanted to discuss something privately with someone I wouldnt expect to be able to do it on a forum and be guaranteed that noone else could possibly read it. If i asked the admin if they could and they said they had the 'option' 'turned off' i would take that to mean 'generally no, but if i need or want to then i can' and then i'd decide how much that bothered me. If i decided i didnt want the admin to be able to read them i certainly wouldnt expect or even want them to turn off the function altogether as for the remainder of the time it's a useful capability. When i plan to take over the world i would just choose to use a somewhat more secure mechanism. Obviously that's your choice and I'm by no means saying you should enable whispers if you choose not to, but disabling them just because some users may not realise that their private conversations arent private to a nosy admin seems a bit of a shame.

Wanderer

Point taken Minisweeper, I'll put it to them again with your "convenience/clutter" perspective.

SlashedZero

This is a pretty cool extension, thanks for this
However the AJAX list is still useful: how would you start a private discussion without it ?

aloicious

I don't want users' private, compromising or sensitive information on any sites I run. Call me a despot, but as a site owner/admin I want full access to all content being displayed on my sites - including whispers. I'd also make that publicly understood that although your whisper is private and between the two users involved, any and all admins have access to these whispers. Email's a better conduit for private discussion. No secrets, completely transparent and users know where they stand. No issues of trust either.

Pol

I concur with aloicious. Given a choice between an admin who acknowledges his/her ability and right to read private messages/whispers, and an admin who claims not to (or not to be able to), I'd find the former more trustworthy. The server admin can technically see anything in the database, so I'd rather trust one who's forthright about that. Speaking of whispers, is there an extension to allow users to receive email notifications of new whispers?

Polo

No idea Pol. Make one. :D However, this little small improvement - MUST be included in next release, so easy and yet powerful. Mark are you listening?

Stash

Polo, you say that EVERY extension that is half good (no offense to the extension makers) should be included in the next release of Vanilla... understand this, it's not going to happen Thank god!

If you like the extension, install it, that is why it's an extension. Not everyone shares your view. I shall now henceforth just pretend that you say "Must be included in the next release" and all variants

I still like the idea of this and other "user" extensions like it being stuck in a dropdown menu that appears when you mouseover someone's name/avatar. Would keep the page and posts neat/uncluttered and allow you to add quite a lot before it becomes too much.

TomTester

Stash, fully agree on need for lack of clutter. I hated VB and those others because of the clutter.

Vanilla is pretty clean by default and extensions add more & more clutter again. I know I don't have to add them, but I do appreciate
the features, just not the display (e.g. on this forum, the rather useless 'block user, block comment, text-only mode, etc.).

Weird idea of the day: how about a 'minimalist mode' (not unlike PDA mode on VBulletin) to hide anything but the most basic features.

Stash

Tom, I like that idea, would that be another extension? Would it just ignore all other extensions? Just a select few?

Perhaps if it disabled all extensions barring ones you put in a whitelist? That way you could keep the extensions that improve functionaility but don't add clutter.

I get the feeling this would be hard to implement...

TomTester

Different scenarios:

1. Admin level (could be useful in sudden high-traffic scenarios too)

Admin defines "light mode" vs "full mode", select which extensions are active in the extension selection list, two check-boxes ->
results in extensions.php with some IF/THENs based on general setting, user setting or a cookie?

2. User level (indeed much easier conceptually but more difficult implementation-wise)

Simplest implementation is a NO-CLUTTER stylesheet to hide selected content on the page as part of the default vanilla theme.

Better solution would be real suppression of text output by extensions, but that would require a lot a thinking over the
practical implementations (not sure if this can be suppressed at the render level)

Best solution would be a combo of 1 and 2 perhaps, i.e. admin determines which extensions MAY be disabled, user can
select which ones are not required for his/her purposes.

Middle of the road is best I think. So 1 + user selection of "light" mode (or in line with other boards, "PDA mode") on demand.

Stash

I see, so no clutter does NOT necessarily mean low b/w.

TomTester

Correct, clutter is visual in my perspective.

Sorry stash, just edited the post while you responded.

TomTester

... but I would prefer a LIGHT (low kB) mode.

First to go in light mode is the whispers... this alone saves 25k in javascript just for the silly live name matching.