Tim

My feedback

  1. 13 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    6 comments  ·  Wishlist » Contacts  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Tim supported this idea  · 
    Tim shared this idea  · 
  2. 92 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    31 comments  ·  Wishlist » Contacts  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Tim supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Tim commented  · 

    I should like to be able to set a mask on text fields in the member record so that data entered by users in those fields was correctedly formatted.

    Uses would include telephone numbers and postal/zip codes where a correct reponse follows a consistant format.

  3. 74 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    26 comments  ·  Wishlist » Members  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Tim supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Tim commented  · 

    Rather than achieve this through the database, you could achieve the same result using the Google maps implementation described earlier - just centre the map on the user's location and scale it cover the required radius.

    Other users data would be on the map but off the scale.

    Something like http://www.ev-network.org.uk/Default.aspx?pageId=524100&mdd=40302

  4. 14 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    10 comments  ·  Wishlist » Security / Privacy  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Tim supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Tim commented  · 

    Given that the need is now recognised, in what sort of timeframe might we expect to see a solution?

    For me implementing this http://forums.wildapricot.com/forums/308929-general-discussion-and-questions/suggestions/8822308-behaviour-security-of-memberpublicprofile-aspx would also significantly improve security as it would provide another route to a degree of differential security based in membership levels.

    Given my current security concerns then one or the other solution would be desirable fairly quickly, and ideally both in time.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Tim commented  · 

    At present the defaults for privacy settings (anybody/members/no access) on fields on the members' records are set for the whole database via the Member Profile Page. The next level of granularity is at the level of the individual field edit for each individual member. This is a huge jump and can be a major administrative burden for admins.

    Imagine that you have some membership levels where a substantial part of the profile should be available to all and other membership levels where those same fields should only be visible to other members. At the moment you can only set one set of defaults across the entire database and must manually edit each individual field privacy setting for every member of every membership level that needs the other setting.

    If you have a 15,000 members database (max recommended by WA), of which half the records should be visible to all and half only to members, and twenty fields on each record then the admin needs to make 15,000 x 50% x 20 = 150,000 edits to set security levels on the database.

    I'd like to see more flexibility on the member profile page so that the admin can reset the privacy settings by membership level and thus create different privacy defaults for different membership levels. Thus a new member would inherit the default privacy settings appropriate to his/her membership level and not a site-wide default that may be completely inappropriate and require field-by-field edits to correct.

Feedback and Knowledge Base