As you may – or as evidence suggests – may not of noticed, I had previously mentioned globally setting, and setting again to other values, the permalink settings. Which, I’m to understand, would replicate changes throughout the database. I’ll surmise that assumption is correct, by the virtue of all the links to the page themselves operate as expected – ie: delivers content as opposed to content not found error that occurs when clicking the “register” link, where it fails to mimick the URL scheme utilised happily by the rest of the site…
I’m able to deduce no information to suggest that the page created, and assigned to function via the offered dropdown menu is a template modal. Strikes me as poor form to edit template models as default. I’ll assume this isn’t true as editing one of these pages doesn’t replicate changes across all of them.
Respectfully, I disagree. When I click “register” I do not expect an empty page(once I’ve forced it to the right URL. And I mean completely empty. Pure white space, else 404). I expect a pretty form, with input boxes, using which a random third party could create themselves an account with which to use the services. I don’t think that to be an unreasonable expectation. Likewise, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect that clicking “activity” should produce something like a list of recently generated content, potentially filterable by user, and sorted chronologically. It would not be uncommon to click “members” and expect to see a list, possibly alphbetised, of users currently signed up for services. If these are “features” the user is expected to deploy, wouldn’t it be at least good manners to mention this?
