Webbright
My feedback
14 results found
-
5 votesWebbright
shared this idea
·
-
82 votes
-
127 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Webbright
supported this idea
·
-
8 votesWebbright
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Webbright
commented
If a membership application is rejected, the record is changed to Contact instead of Member. The problem with this is that membership information captured in an application is lost.
Please look into revising the workflow for rejecting membership applications. Ideally, the record should be retained as a member and tracked under rejects in the Member Summary report.
An error occurred while saving the comment Webbright
commented
Yes, it would be very helpful to track rejected applications. Right now if an applicant get rejected, the record switches to a non-member status. The information submitted in the application are lost in all membership fields for that record since non-members don't have them. This can cause an issue. For example, if the application has qualifying questions and the applicant gets rejected base on this data, the information is lost once the application is rejected and there is no historic data to explain the rejection in the future (unless captured manually by an administrator in the notes field). Not the best solution. I suggest rejects are tracked under member records instead.
Webbright
shared this idea
·
-
1 voteWebbright
shared this idea
·
-
23 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Webbright
commented
This site provides a great example of how content (such as a webinar) is only visible to members, yet the (landing) page is public: http://www.hci.org/content/webcasts
Harvard Business Review is another example of a site that restricts certain content to members while providing "teaser preview" to the public.
Voting on this feature on behalf of some of our clients and potential Wild Apricot clients who expressed interest in this behavior.
Webbright
supported this idea
·
-
49 votesWebbright
supported this idea
·
-
14 votesWebbright
supported this idea
·
-
18 votesWebbright
supported this idea
·
-
5 votesWebbright
supported this idea
·
-
26 votesWebbright
supported this idea
·
-
225 votesWebbright
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Webbright
commented
I would also like to see this functionality. Our organization would like to use this feature to contact non members after an event with a membership promotion information (to get them to join the organization). In our case, we'll need to send to a sub-group of attendees (non members). How about if you give the user the option to send to attendees by registration type?
-
28 votesWebbright
supported this idea
·
Webbright
shared this idea
·
-
2 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Webbright
commented
This is very nice. Have you guys done the design and development in-house?
Once a web page is edited and saved, the changes are published online. However, in some cases, it is useful to work on a page, save the changes, and publish later when the changes are ready to be made public.
In some other systems, this is done by making page editing and publishing two different steps (ie, two step editing and publishing process).
The workaround we apply now is to make a copy of the page, edit the copy in Admin only view, then either duplicate all changes on the original page, or remove and replace. Not a practical solution.
In addition, in Chrome I've been encountering issues with pages that are edited and not saved. A dialog appears to continue editing, but most of the time does not work properly.
Please consider the two step process suggested.
Thanks.