"Allow admin to lock privacy settings on certain fields" implemented in 5.2 release on December 10, 2014. See 5.2 release description http://help.wildapricot.com/display/DOC/Release+5.2 for details.

We are addressing this feature in upcoming 5.2. release - administrators will be able to lock certain fields from hiding by users. Check the presentation below for details.

(Click on the image below to start presentation)

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/112SmRdHlGossd6zaHDWQnFKc-ikZTYdOc2rb1P9TQUk/pub?start=false&loop=false&delayms=3000

5.2. release is currently planned for beginning of December 2014 and contains number of other enhancements. You can always track current progress in Roadmap thread http://forums.wildapricot.com/forums/308932-wishlist/suggestions/8827717-roadmap-2015-plans-releases-expected-dates .Feel free to post your comments here.

Yeah, we really need this, especially for our sponsors. They all need to look the same and really don't want them messing with it (mostly want things we've turned off to stay turned off!).

Yeah, we really need this, especially for our sponsors. They all need to look the same and really don't want them messing with it (mostly want things we've turned off to stay turned off!).

We just imported our existing 350 members and already this locking privacy issue is becoming a huge issue.

Our member search is set up to list members by order of membership level (the members paying most appear at the top of the list). However, if a member in a lower level chooses to hide the privacy in their membership level, they are automatically put at the top of the list in the search.

1- We need to lock the membership level privacy to always show so nobody changes it.

2- If we cannot do this, is there any other way we can ensure that the members show up in the correct order sorted by Membership Level (then by) Member since (then by) Member Last name. Members who opt to show in the directory should always come up in this order.

Thanks for your help on this immediate need and keeping the privacy locking issue at the forefront of development.

This would be truly helpful for us. Our association is for licensed massage therapists who are, by law, required to post their license number in all "advertising" materials (which their directory listing on our web site is considered by the regulatory board). They could, in theory, keep their name public and their license number private (if they keep everything private, it is not an issue). Further, since we do occasionally support (or oppose) legislative efforts, transparency as to who is behind funding for causes is needed for us (in other words, we may need to require that a member name only be listed). I don't want to force anyone to publicize contact information, but legally, if they post their name, their license number MUST be on it and we don't have control over that currently. Thank you for considering this!

I joined your comment to the main thread. You can vote on the wishlist in the same way as on the roadmap - though a detailed comment as you already wrote is even better than a vote.

We moved to the roadmap for now because of other competing priorities,

It is still our intention to address this, though it will be longer before we get to this than I originally hoped.

On the support forum this thread seems to be missing from the roadmap and you cannot vote on it in the wish list.

http://forums.wildapricot.com/forums/308920-archive/suggestions/8833726-allow-admin-to-lock-privacy-settings-on-certain-fi

You suggested this perfect solution for our needs, but I can't seem to vote on it:

Based on all the input we have been receiving I believe the best solution is to change it to:

Administrators to set default privacy settings AND specify for each field whether it can be changed by member with the following options:
1) Member can't change settings for this field at all.
2) Member can ONLY RESTRICT it further. (e.g. Admin can set email field to only show to Members, member can decide to hide it altogether - but CAN NOT decide to show it to Public visitors )
3) Member can change it in any direction - to restrict OR to extend access (e.g. Admin can set email field to only show to Members, but member can decide to show it to Public visitors or to hide it altogether)

Wondering why was this moved back to the wish list?

There are certain field that we need our members to provide, but we always want private. For example, we do not want phone numbers to show up on our list at all.

At present users have full control over which of their fields are visible (anyone / members / no access) and indeed can hide their profile completely from everyone else.

In some community sites this is inappropriate as it allows users to enjoy the rights of membership (since they can see other's records) while not taking on the responsibilities of membership (since others can't see their record either at all or enough of it to be useful).

I'd thus like to see the Member Profile Page modified so that in addition to setting default access levels for each field the admin can (where necessary) prevent the member from changing the default setting. (I envisage a fourth column on the table with tick boxes labeled "User Can Edit" or similar)

Members would still be able to see what setting was applied to each field in their own record but some fields might be grayed out where site configuration prevented the member editing the privacy setting for that field.

If a member felt unhappy with the minimum level of responsibility to other members required by the site then they always have the opportunity to leave.

Moving this back to the wishlist for the time being.

I agree, I think it would be very beneficial to let the admin lock privacy settings for certain fields. Forums have a way of going bad when people can post anonymously. Personally, for my site, I would lock it so members first names and their company name is listed on the forums. If the member chooses to show more information (such as their last name) then the member can change that in their privacy settings.

Moving this to roadmap.

I agree with wchester on this one. If our members want to be active particpants and to post/comment on Forum posts then it is only fair that they tell us and their fellow members who they are. Making people accountable for their comments keeps things clean and civilized.

Could this setting simply be achieved by having an additional forum setting (at the individual forum or forum category level) for "Allow anonymous posts: Yes / No". If Yes, then everything stays as it is, If "No" then a users First name / Last name (Organisation or another Alias might also be allowed) is visible against any entry they make.

To keep things simple, I would expect this setting could over-ride a users current privacy settings, provided that the forum introductions made it clear that anonymous posts were not allowed and that their user name would be published against their comment, with a simple check box to acknowledge those terms.

If a user subsequently reversed their agreement to this, then either their historic comments would be deleted, or they should remain attributed to the user name (but they shouldnt change to Anonymous...)

Generally I completely agree on giving the end-user complete control over their own privacy settings, but if you want to play in my yard, I have a right to know who you are...

Any idea on when we can expect this kind of feature?

From our own point-of-view this kind of feature - improving and fine-tuning the existing features of WA is more desirable than some of the *big* items on the wishlist such as "online store"... :-)

I like the idea. For me it is a question of priorities of other wish list needs that are more important to me.

Sounds great from my end!

Please see http://forums.wildapricot.com/forums/308920-archive/suggestions/8831578-access-to-member-profile-page-change-in-function for background info.

In summary, current functionality is that administrators can set default per-field privacy settings on membership fields but each member can override these settings for his/her profile and show less or more. (See http://help.wildapricot.com/display/DOC/Member+privacy+settings )

Based on all the input we have been receiving I believe the best solution is to change it to:

Administrators to set default privacy settings AND specify for each field whether it can be changed by member with the following options:
1) Member can't change settings for this field at all.
2) Member can ONLY RESTRICT it further. (e.g. Admin can set email field to only show to Members, member can decide to hide it altogether - but CAN NOT decide to show it to Public visitors )
3) Member can change it in any direction - to restrict OR to extend access (e.g. Admin can set email field to only show to Members, but member can decide to show it to Public visitors or to hide it altogether)

This is a substantial chunk of development work but I think this is the only way to provide flexibility for varying needs of clients.

I would appreciate comments and votes on this.

You guys are great with your quick replies to every post. Kudos.

I understand your point. I will move this thread into wishlist so that we can get feedback from other users to prioritize this against other requests.