Community

Forums » SEPHP Feature Requests

Most Recently Online

    • 358 posts
    June 22, 2018 9:02 AM EDT

    Feature Title: Member Browse/Sort Recently Online

    Feature Description: Allow people to be able to search and sort members via when they were last online. Larger/Older sites with large userbases run into the issue with inactive members and current members wish to be able to see who is still a viable connection.

    Screenshot: None

    Other Comments: None

    • Moderator
    • 3853 posts
    June 23, 2018 4:46 AM EDT

    Thanks for the request. It almost follows the guidelines so we'll consider. A few questions.

    1. Should there be a user privacy setting for "Show in online activity search results" or some such thing. Needs better wording so please feel free to give suggestions.

    2. Does it need an admin setting to "Show staff in online activity search results" as some sites actually hide staff. 

    Anything else that might have been missed?

    • 358 posts
    June 23, 2018 10:52 AM EDT

    It was my first request :)

    1. I would think wording could be something like "show most recently online" - then have it sort as such descending... In essence it is just a sort feature. I wouldn't want to see when people were online though as I am sure everyone has members in their database that are 1 hit wonders.

    2. For me, no; I want my staff reachable. But I would expect that it should apply privacy settings from the rest of the site and respect hidden members.

  • gs
    • 861 posts
    June 23, 2018 3:24 PM EDT

    Re#01

    I'm thinking the question is about a User setting, not the function of the widget.  I would like a separate User setting (like what Donna mentioned) as per similar settings used for other content.  This way I have the option to not be hidden but specifically disallow my last online status (to everyone other than ADMIN).  Just my 2cents.

    • 358 posts
    June 23, 2018 3:53 PM EDT

    I can see what you are saying GS - maybe an admin setting that allows people to be hidden from online view?

    In our community we do not allow private / hidden viewing

  • gs
    • 861 posts
    June 23, 2018 4:27 PM EDT

    That makes sense to me because I believe in most things having at least an ADMIN setting (to allow each ADMIN to determine what they want for their site, not SE or any dev), and then some of these to allow the User an option.  I guess I think that many (most?) functions/features should have the following minimum in ADMINcp:

    • Enable (for all)
    • Enable, but allow User to make their own setting based on ML
    • Disable (for all)

    This provides ADMIN with control of their site, not the software dev.  Plus it (optionally) allows the User to determine what's best for them.  Flexibility is key to me, and no non-custom developed software company should have the audacity to think they know everything about what I (or the Users) want for my site, or what's best.  This reminds me of the auto-save feature (not auto-backup, that's another whole discussion) becoming more prevalent in recent years.  If the software has a setting to enable/disable then great, otherwise their 'helpful' is often a major hassle.


    This post was edited by gs at June 23, 2018 7:31 PM EDT
    • 358 posts
    June 23, 2018 6:17 PM EDT

    Also every plugin NEEDS to have member level control - those of us that monetize rely on that to give more to our subscribing groups or take away from the free loaders!

  • gs
    • 861 posts
    June 23, 2018 7:34 PM EDT

    Ah - glad you reminded me of that.  I added ML to my prev post.

     

    More and more I'm relying on that fantastic Plugin by Web80 to display widgets based on ML as a workaround for much of what's lacking in SE and 3PD settings and widgets.

    • Moderator
    • 3853 posts
    June 24, 2018 6:34 AM EDT
    ITLJames said:

    It was my first request :)

    :) Best to use the stickied guidelines that are at the top of the feature request area to help structure the requests as it does help. It was still a good request.

    1. I would think wording could be something like "show most recently online" - then have it sort as such descending... In essence it is just a sort feature. I wouldn't want to see when people were online though as I am sure everyone has members in their database that are 1 hit wonders.

    I meant user privacy permissions. :)

    2. For me, no; I want my staff reachable. But I would expect that it should apply privacy settings from the rest of the site and respect hidden members.

     

    • Moderator
    • 3853 posts
    June 24, 2018 6:41 AM EDT
    gs said:

    That makes sense to me because I believe in most things having at least an ADMIN setting (to allow each ADMIN to determine what they want for their site, not SE or any dev), and then some of these to allow the User an option.  I guess I think that many (most?) functions/features should have the following minimum in ADMINcp:

    • Enable (for all)
    • Enable, but allow User to make their own setting based on ML
    • Disable (for all)

    This provides ADMIN with control of their site, not the software dev.  Plus it (optionally) allows the User to determine what's best for them.  Flexibility is key to me, and no non-custom developed software company should have the audacity to think they know everything about what I (or the Users) want for my site, or what's best.  This reminds me of the auto-save feature (not auto-backup, that's another whole discussion) becoming more prevalent in recent years.  If the software has a setting to enable/disable then great, otherwise their 'helpful' is often a major hassle.

    Remember, software devs also have to consider site load and issues. For example, another script added a feature that clients wanted even though they knew it was a bad idea because clients were upset that it hadn't been added before. Adding that feature destabilized the feed and caused data loss. Best to do two things:

    1. Consider client requests and investigate if they can be implemented without harming the overall core product.

    2. Investigate whether that implementation will be detrimental to the overall site load and performance. If so, it's not something that will benefit a lot and will end up harming a higher percent of clients. In that case, it's best to leave it to third party experts so that clients who want that high load and cost can choose to do so without messing up the higher amount of clients who don't want that. 

    So, remember not to think of a software company as the enemy here. We have a lot to consider when looking at feature requests. If we don't add something, there is a very good reason for that. It's not just to be mean or controlling. Developers LOVE to code. It's what they do. They spend a LOT of time researching new code, learning new techniques, reading about latest security issues and code standards, etc. There are also limits to what mysql, php, etc can do without breaking other things or requiring server updates that may break other things. 

    Look at what happened recently when a client updated their server to PHP 7. Their site broke. Not due to SEPHP, due to their third party plugins that won't work in PHP 7. We have to consider everything when considering a feature request and what settings can or can not safely go in that request. laughing

  • gs
    • 861 posts
    June 24, 2018 11:06 AM EDT
    '...Adding that feature destabilized the feed and caused data loss...'
    IMHO, implementing something that will break is obviousl6 a poor choice. But not implementing the FR shouldn't be the result - it should be to write coce that won't break.


    As far as 3PD coding, most of the FRs I require are for Core, which by definition could never be certified if deveooped by a 3PD, and obviously create additional challenges upon upgrading SE if a 3PD edits core.. I've already spent a fortune on 3PD products and customization (like many have) to get functionality that doesn't exist in core (much of wich shouldn't due to % who need it). I have suggested that SE dev an Advanced ADMINcp product which addresses all concerns: 1) developed and supported by SE (so it's not a 3PD modifying core; 2) core wouldn't be penalized by any potential performance issues as this isn't a core product (it's just like Atlas in this regard or 3PD products); 3) it finally gets many of the FRs developed and into the hands of us ADMINs that need/want them and some for quite a while; 4) brings in additional revenue to SE; 5) etc

    As far as thinking of a software company as the enemy, that was not my intent, so I apologize if that's how I came across. All I was trying to express is that far too often software vendors seem to not think things through very well before implementing some 'beneficial' features, and users are stuck paying the price for this (remember when Microsoft initially added automatic spell, capitalization,and proper spacing correction to Word, without separate options to enable/disable?).
    This post was edited by gs at June 24, 2018 11:16 AM EDT
  • June 28, 2018 3:27 AM EDT

    Online users, yes I like the idea and its implementation. What about recently viewed pages for online users? that way you can get a feel for the engagement needs of your community in real time?