BuddyPress.org

You’ll need to install bbPress as an external install.

Download bbPress @ bbpress.org/download.

Find integration guides @ bbpress.org/forums or this link:

http://theeasybutton.com/blog/2009/07/17/integrating-buddypress-wordpress-mu-and-bbpress/

Omit the BP integration steps in that guide.

Why don’t you just use WPMU + BBpress as your starting point?

Buddypress is next generation social networking. It offers features that end-users have come to expect via Facebook, LinkedIn, etc. Groups are an integral part of that; forums are an awkward add-on imho.

If you have BP installed on connect.idotter.ch, you should be able to access your group forums at connect.idotter.ch/forums.

How are you trying to install the forums component? It should be as easy as going to “BuddyPress > Forums setup” in the WP admin backend.

I am trying to install Buddypress 1.2 with WordPress 2.9.1 (SU) & Buddypress Tempalte Pack. I am unable to activate Buddpress. It gives a Error 500: Internal server error. Please help.

Aren’t there loads of plugins for these types of features?

All these feature request threads start to get on my nerves – I should cut back on coffee… – when I’m still wasting way too much time trying to fix basic core management and usability issues in my sites.

And forums shouldn’t even be in Buddypress at all imho. It’s an older generation web community format that clashes with the new social networking paradigms. BP should focus on groups and (micro)blogging and turn that into a solid and coherent platform, not get sidetracked by forums and all these generic feature requests.

Have you tried to use your WPMU alone at first ?

I recommand you to test anything in WPMU (creating blogs, users, sending mails, etc)

If all is ok, install buddypress and deactivate all the 7 BP plugins (buddypress ->options) exept one . View if it’s working, activate the second, and so on…

See your server configuration. Could be a php memory problem. WPMU need at least 64 Mb…

There is a new plugin I just found called BuddyPress Rate Forum Posts — https://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/buddypress-rate-forum-posts/. I haven’t tried it yet, but I plan to. It allows thumbs up/down voting on Forum posts and in the process users receive “karma points” for the quality and frequency of their posts. So, in theory, spammers would get bad karma scores from other users, and you could search for users with bad karma and then delete them.

@pjnu what globe icon are you referring to?

@MrMaz, please change the font color next to the globe icon to a link color, not the gray color

Users of the site had noooo idea that that text to the right of the globe icon are links. Since its large, in a heading font and gray, it’s reasonable for someone to have difficulty finding out that that’s how you get to the links.

Could you please update the code so it’s the same font color as links elsewhere on the site?? Thank you.

@Dwenaus I was thinking of a Group Categorization plugin to allow me to sgment the directory and showcase groups better but this might very well fit the bill. Are group tags exposed via functions inyour plugin so we can shape a directory listing (or even avail in a variable eg bp_get_group_tag() ?

I’ve just attached the theme patch to the trac ticket here https://trac.buddypress.org/ticket/2063#comment:1

trac ticket and patch are here https://trac.buddypress.org/ticket/2063#comment:1

whoops – just collided with @Erich73

anyway, my patch would be for adding links to report posts as abusive, rather than for tackling the issue of group creation

@andrew

see this:

https://trac.buddypress.org/ticket/1150

Yes i think the issue is not yet resolved by buddypress!

Being a admin of my group forum i can not moderate the forum topics that posted by others .

Any answers from our members?

I’ve just proposed the adding of a new action hook that would make it easy to develop a plugin for this. The action hook is suggested for another purpose, but would work for this purpose as well.

See https://buddypress.org/forums/topic/new-plugin-buddypress-rate-forum-posts/page/2#post-39751 – the proposed action is bp_single_forum_topic_links

If that hook gets incorporated, then writing a plugin to do what you want would be very easy.

Alternatively, you could also just modify your theme directly, to add it. See the theme file groups/single/forum/topic.php</b> , in the loop:

while ( bp_forum_topic_posts() ) : bp_the_forum_topic_post();

At the moment, the classes are added to individual posts in a topic, by javascript. This results in extra server load, because wordpress has to do two whole startups for each such page. The trade-off is adding another apply_filter and a do_action to the theme, but as this plugin already benefits from one such proposed theme change, we can get two for the price of one.

Proposed change to buddypress/bp-themes/bp-default/groups/single/forum/topic.php, from line 26:

<ul id="topic-post-list" class="item-list">

<?php while ( bp_forum_topic_posts() ) : bp_the_forum_topic_post();  ?>

<li <?php

$topic_post_id = bp_get_the_topic_post_id();

echo "id='post-$topic_post_id' class='",

apply_filters('bp_single_forum_topic_post_css',array('class'=>'', 'post_id'=>$topic_post_id)),

"'";

?> >

<div class="poster-meta">

<a href="<?php bp_the_topic_post_poster_link() ?>">

<?php bp_the_topic_post_poster_avatar( 'width=40&height=40' ) ?>

</a>

<?php echo sprintf( __( '%s said %s ago:', 'buddypress' ), bp_get_the_topic_post_poster_name(), bp_get_the_topic_post_time_since() ) ?>

</div>



<div class="post-content">

<?php bp_the_topic_post_content() ?>

</div>



<div class="admin-links">

<?php

if ( bp_group_is_admin() || bp_group_is_mod() || bp_get_the_topic_post_is_mine() ) :

bp_the_topic_post_admin_links();

endif;

do_action( 'bp_single_forum_topic_links' , $topic_post_id );

?>

<a href="#post-<?php echo $topic_post_id; ?>" title="<?php _e( 'Permanent link to this post', 'buddypress' ) ?>">#</a>

</div>

</li>

<?php endwhile; ?>

</ul>

Proposed change to buddypress-rate-forum-posts/bp-rate-forum-posts.php, insert:

// modifies the css class for topics to highlight popular posts, and hide very unpopular ones

function rfp_css_class_for_post($args) {

global $rfp;

$class = $args['class'];

$post_rating = rfp_get_post_rating( $args['post_id'] );

$rfpclass = '';

error_log('rfp='.print_r($rfp,true));

if ( $post_rating == NULL )

$rfpclass = '';

else if ( $post_rating >= $rfp->superboost )

$rfpclass = 'rfp-superboost';

elseif ( $post_rating >= $rfp->boost )

$rfpclass = 'rfp-boost';

elseif ( $post_rating <= $rfp->hide )

$rfpclass = 'rfp-hide';

elseif ( $post_rating <= $rfp->diminish )

$rfpclass = 'rfp-diminish';

//error_log("in rfp_css_class_for_post rating '$post_rating' adding class '$rfpclass' to '$class' with args ".print_r($args,true));

return $class.($class?' ''').$rfpclass;

}

add_filter( 'bp_single_forum_topic_post_css', 'rfp_css_class_for_post', 3);



function rfp_echo_hidden_post_link($post_id) {

global $rfp;

$post_rating = rfp_get_post_rating( $post_id );

if ( $post_rating && $post_rating <= $rfp->hide )

echo "<span class='rfp-show' onclick='jQuery(this).remove();jQuery("#post-$post_id").removeClass( "rfp-hide" );'>Click to show this hidden post</span>";

}

add_action( 'bp_single_forum_topic_links', 'rfp_echo_hidden_post_link', 3);

And then the javascript section starting jQuery(document).ready( function() can be removed from buddypress-rate-forum-posts/js, and the corresponding section can be removed from the end of buddypress-rate-forum-posts/rate.php

@mentionsw I agree with your opinion that buddypress shouldn’t try to copy the Twitter model for user to user interaction. The Twitter design excels at some forms of user to user interaction but is incredibly awkward and difficult to use for doing something as simple as initiating and holding a conversation.

It’s no secret that the overwhelming majority of Twitter users stop tend to quickly stop participating in two-way conversations and instead become passive consumers of updates by a small group of very active twitter users. This is in a large part due to the fact that the twitter system is very unfriendly towards bidirectional user interaction. Even with a Twitter client it can be really easy to loose track of a conversation because @mentions are linked to the user instead of a specific tweet. Facebook and similarly designed services are vastly superior in this regard.

I don’t think buddypress should be copying the Twitter system while at the same time excluding the systems such as Facebook and Myspace which the large majority of people are accustomed with. Instead, the twitter system should be part of a system that gives buddypress users the option of different types of user to user interaction instead of forcing them to use one particular style.

On a side note, I don’t think this has anything to do with a generation gap between Twitter users and Facebook users. Sites like Twitter, Facebook, Myspace, Youtube all have different kinds of qualities that are suited to satisfy specific social needs of their respective users. For some needs people are more likely to use one network and for other needs people are more likely to use another network. Just because the Twitter system is relatively new and currently being hyped doesn’t make it superior to other systems.

I like @Lansharks idea too. I could definitely use that feature.

@Grosbouff : If you could give us an idea on how to do that, I would try to learn and implement it.

Thanks for the plug-in and the hard work.

@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.