BuddyPress.org

Yeah, it’s a bit of a change, isn’t it?

My strategy for making the transition easier for my users is two-fold:

1) Make the profile the default view for users (rather than activity), by adding

define( 'BP_DEFAULT_COMPONENT', $bp->default_component = 'profile' );

to wp-config.php

2) Adding the @mentions profile tab, plus some explanatory text, to the members/single/home.php template in my child theme. Thus, right below

<?php locate_template( array( 'members/single/profile.php' ), true ) ?>

I’m adding

<h4><?php bp_displayed_user_fullname(); ?>'s mentions</h4>

<p>Whenever anyone posts an update on this site containing <?php bp_displayed_user_fullname(); ?>'s handle (<strong>@<?php bp_displayed_user_username() ?></strong>), it shows up as a public message below.</p>



<p>Want to leave your own public message for <?php bp_displayed_user_fullname(); ?>?



<div class="generic-button" id="post-mention" >

<a href="<?php bp_send_public_message_link() ?>" title="<?php _e( 'Mention this user in a new public message, this will send the user a notification to get their attention.', 'buddypress' ) ?>"><?php _e( 'Mention this User', 'buddypress' ) ?></a>

</div>

followed by the activity loop, taken right from bp-default/activity/activity-loop.php, but with the following relevant modification: the arguments for bp_has_activities are

<?php if ( bp_has_activities( 'scope=mentions' ) ) : ?>

(You’ll have to do some styling to make it look right, but you get the idea.)

It’s not an exact duplication of the Wire – I’ve tried to embrace the new @mention stuff, while still capturing the “leave a note for me” spirit of the Wire.

I definitely agree with this. I’ll have a look around and see if I can find something myself, but other than that, I hope they add something back in.

I understand that they wanted the @mentions to become the new way of commenting on someones wall, but you can post directly onto groups… so why not a member page as well.

Like you said it’s more familiar to people. They just need to bring back the “wire”

That works for me with a couple of isssues. The first user to log in via fbconnect is assigned the name “@facebookuser”, later signups seem to use the fb name for the @mention id, but their displayed name can be changed in the BP profile. The fb profile picture is skewed in the activity feed (twice as long as high).

@modemlooper It’s similar but it’s inconsistent and confusing for users. I have to agree with nickrita that this appears to be a case of ‘Verschlimmbesserung’. It makes it unnecessarily complex to do something as simple as to leave a comment on someone’s profile and continue a conversation from there.

If the user activity stream is really meant to be purely about activities of the user as Andy said, why are we able to leave replies that show up in the user activity stream? If this principle were to be applied consistently, the user should also not be able to post replies into a user activity stream (or at least they should not show up in the user activity stream but instead at the @mention subsection).

As a result of these inconsistencies we have we have this confusing hybrid of Twitter and Facebook. I really like the idea of @mentions as an added feature to the way users can interact, but it shouldn’t be the sole method of (semi-)public user to user interaction. One of the major weaknesses of Twitter (and one of the major reasons Twitter clients are so popular) is that it’s extremely difficult to initiate and keep track of (semi)-public conversations on their website. Just try using twitter.com to hold multiple conversations if you have a group of active friends on there, it’s extremely frustrating and labour intensive. Buddypress doesn’t have the luxury of anything that resembles twitter clients to cover up these kind of limitations that are inherent to the twitter system.

I feel that the current implementation of buddypress leaves these weaknesses of the design of the twitter system intact and even further exacerbates them by inconsistent application.

I therefore plead for a consistent design that allows users to post both messages and replies into a user activity stream regardless of whether it’s the site, group or user activity stream. This would take care of the issue of the missing wire while at the same time providing a consistent user interaction design for the activity streams across a buddypress site.

@motionsw What would you think of a system where a user would be able to leave a message directly on the page of the user at the activity stream, similar to the way Facebook does it (and consistent in design with how you can leave a message on the buddypress group & site activity streams with a textbox near the top)? Whether such a message would then turn up in the group & site activity stream would be handled by privacy settings.

@r-a-y:

I was originally thinking along the same line as you. Just filter the @mentions not just for us, but for everyone to see in a tab on everybody’s profile page, right?

However when you really think about it, it’s really kind of redundant. Why would you do that if say you could’ve gone to that person’s profile page, clicked on their @mentions tab and post your message there, without ever trying to figure out what their username is. I mean per se, the @mentions tab will eventually turn into a wall-like tab, right? Typing @ might be an incentive because it is a shortcut without visiting that person’s profile page prior to writing them something. But it is only for people whose usernames you are familiar with.

Actually, it could be a capturing area for both. Either messages with an @ tag or messages posted on that tab will be there. This would be a better implementation. And obviously users should be notified of both when they arrive.

Edit: There is already a solution up there. Put the @username out of the message box (like sending a personal message), and let a message box on the profile page’s @mentions tab behave the same way. Clicking “Send a Public Message” should bring you to that @mentions tab on their profile. Done! This is solved

Arx:

Here’s my suggestion – @mentions tab on a displayed user’s profile.

This solves all concerns about the deprecated wire component.

What does everyone think?

I agree with David about how a user will see the @username and might delete the text.

—

Originally posted by Andy:

Why would someone else’s activity display on your activity stream?

True, but I think adding an @mentions page on the displayed-user’s profile would help remedy users who like the wire.

You could make this page viewable if you’re logged in only.

One thing I don’t like about Twitter is I have to go to search.twitter.com to view @mentions of another user.

Excellent point. Not all is lost but I will take this opportunity to provide some feedback to @jjj and @apeatling re 1.2 in it’s current state

1. I get the use of the Twitter @ metaphor and adding “mentions” to the filters. Cool. BUT, it introduces a potential UI snag for users. Throughout 1.2 you make nice use of Display Name which users will become accustomed to and identify with. Now, you are identifying users by their user name as well (mixing metaphors, so to speak) as in ->

John Doe

and

@jdoe

Given people’s tendencies to use whacky usernames, thee is a big risk of confusion when both start popping up around the site. Not sure what the solution is but I think it’s not a trivial point, imho.

2. Now that the wire has disappeared and along comes the concept of “Send Public Message” (I get it) let’s look at what vehicle we’re making use of and what it may mean to users. As it currently stands in 1.2, to “Send Public Message” you click that button on someone’s profile and you are taken to your own Status Update field with an @username filled in.

a. the cursor is highlighted just before the @username not after (don’t forget to include a space) – this will only cause people to write the pubic message and push the @username to the end of the message. clunky

b. You’ll probably need to include a @mentions on each person’s profile page otherwise, you’ll never be able to easily see the public message to @username you just wrote. The key point being, you want this to show up on THEIR profile.

c. Probably worth considering including a notification to @username of said public message via email (make optional)

d. Q: Will these @’s be co-mingled in your own status updates and, thus create confusion. Maybe that doesn’t matter and i am overthinking it.On the activity stream, it says John Doe posted an update, when he really sent @username a public message. In Twitter when @ leads a message as 1st character, it has different context than everywhere else in the Tweet. Perhaps -> John Doe sent @username a public message ? or something.

I know I am getting fine grained here but theses (excellent) feature adds need to be over the top intuitive when introduced or they will breed unintended usages.