We'd like to be able to let a varying number of members form groups using the bundles. The only way to do this practically is to have a per-person fee for being in the bundle. All the other functionality would work for us.
I like the idea but see the challenges explained below. At a minimum, a note that tells people that changes will not be saved to their profile would be nice. A password prompt would be even better.
We do not have plans yet on when we’re going to deliver on this.
The Feb 12 2016 proposal would work really well for us. We use sponsor/member logos in multiple places and gadgets around our site. They look terrible in 110x110. Would love to see this asap!
Want to add to my previous comment about sponsor profiles. We are currently using the featured member gadget to create displays of different sponsors. It's great because we can include the sponsors on lots of pages but manage changes from the database. The gadget works pretty well except that the dimensions of the profile display are optimized for head shots. It would be great to have a different display that is horizontal to accommodate logos which tend to be horizontal these days.
We are also a business association. We have a single member level called Sponsors that is free. There are too many variations and kinds of pricing to create separate levels for each. This means, however, that we have to do the invoicing outside WA. (We use the featured member gadget to include sponsor logos on key pages. There's no way to sort profiles so we have to use a gadget for each level of sponsor but it's nice to have the sponsors displayed in a way that's responsive.)
For me personally, this a great suggestion and I’ve been thinking about it for long time myself. Ideally, I’d really like completely redesign our membership levels to concurrent subscriptions model. Subscription gives you access to some information or provide privileges. There can be multiple ways of buying it – e.g. for a year or two, recurring or not, etc. Altogether, subscription-based model is very robust and easy to understand. Please, vote!
Our memberships are linked to geography. So some members want to pay for two different geographies. For that, we need the ability for a member to have the option of more than one membership level.
(Our profiles are very important so different log-ins for different membership levels does not work)
We would like to allow certain key members (such as committee chairs) to have read-only admin access. But the current definition of read-only includes the ability to download the full contact list of the organization.
Our organization has over 4,000 names on our contact list. Even though we trust the people to whom we would give access, it feels inappropriate to give this capability to anyone but full admins. Frankly, I'm not even really sure why this is the case today?
For now, this is not something we’re going to change – not sure if ever.
Workaround to use: create a special “entry” free level to apply to, and close “normal” ones for application. For the entry level, create also a dropdown field where a potential member can choose a level they want to apply to. Add other fields you need to assess the application. When application is successful, your admin is to change membership level to required one and generate membership invoice (membership upgrade invoice). The member will be emailed with the invoice and can pay.
We are new to Wild Apricot. I have to say that when we saw the check boxes for requiring approval prior to accepting a membership, we expected the payment to not be invoiced until we accepted the membership. So we were surprised when the opposite happened.
Our membership committees take their jobs seriously and spend time evaluating an applicant. We have not taken payment in the past until the application was approved.
We definitely vote for this improvement.
We see a lot of value in this. We use the directory to drive people to a member's profile but there's no indication on the profile of the content the member has contributed to the community.
Merged multiple thread into this one. Please, vote (click Vote button) to increase its priority