[Andy Peatling]

Time is very limited before 1.2, there is not enough time to make this option so fine grained.

I think going ahead and introducing an admin option to disable/enable activity stream comments for blog and forum posts will suffice in 1.2? This option will mean commenting on forum and blog posts will be disabled by default, but you can turn it on.

In 1.3 this could possibly be changed to allow admins to pick and choose what is enabled. Although I’m still not convinced whether this should be something the admin has to think about at all.

[Paul Wong-Gibbs]

With regards to blog or forum posts – I may not/do not want to autojoin the group.

Another thought: Maybe an admin option to turn off excerpts in activity would

prevent forking. When I post a new blog or forum post, an update might appear

on the activity feed that says "Boone posted a new blog entry: Boone's

Blog Post", but without an excerpt. People could still comment in ways that

make sense ("Boy Boone, you blog a lot") but they wouldn't really be able to

leave substantive comments on the content of the blog entry/forum post, since

it wouldn't appear on the activity stream.

(Boone Gorges)

+1

[Andy Peatling]

The problem with all this syncing is that you’re making the need to visit the original content almost zero. I don’t think that’s a good thing.

[David Lewis]

I installed the original and it didn’t work. Haven’t tried the ported version mentioned in this thread.

[Mike Pratt]

@Andy – Idea: what if you just ajax’d a window in the SWA into the actual forum posting when you reply to that forum posting so the feeling is the same but, in actuality, you are posting in the forum itself

[Mike Pratt]

realizing this problem of syncing SWA posts and the real, original posts may be very difficult given the SWA is just a new table culled from the original posting tables and therefore not linked. Where are relational db’s when you need ’em!

[Mike Pratt]

@r-a-y you’re right. I was confused. That is EXACTLY what I want as well. un-synced is a non-starter for me

[Boone Gorges]

I share Mike’s original concern about forking conversations. (And I giggled a bit when I wrote “forking conversations”. Fork yeah!) And I think r-a-y’s solution is a really nice one, if it’s doable: allow site admins to turn off inline commenting on certain kinds of activity items. That way we can still take advantage of activity commenting for things like status updates, friendships, etc.

Another thought: Maybe an admin option to turn off excerpts in activity would prevent forking. When I post a new blog or forum post, an update might appear on the activity feed that says “Boone posted a new blog entry: Boone’s Blog Post”, but without an excerpt. People could still comment in ways that make sense (“Boy Boone, you blog a lot”) but they wouldn’t really be able to leave substantive comments on the content of the blog entry/forum post, since it wouldn’t appear on the activity stream. Again, it takes a bit away from what could be great about the activity comments, but it has the virtue of keeping all conversation in one place.

[r-a-y]

@Mike,

I think you’re misunderstanding what I want.

I actually do want forum and blog replies, but only on the original source and not in the AJAX activity comment stream (unless there’s a way we could sync them, like you mentioned above).

As far as the “group auto join” feature, that only happens when you go to the original group forum post to comment, not in the AJAX activity comment stream. You can’t join a group by commenting on a group item in the SWA stream.

[midwestbonsai]

Hmmm, I just installed bbpress in the same db as buddypress.

When I make a post in the forum, nothing shows in the “Site Wide Activity” stream.

I want to do it this way so I can have a full forum, and not just the group forums.

Any thoughts on how to make it work? Did I miss something?

[Mike Pratt]

@r-a-y You highlight exactly why this is an important issue. Including forum and blog replies is the lifeblood of our site and you want yours turned off.

I am hoping the auto join feature can be disabled for commenters in the SWA. I really think SWA in-line commenting will help our site explode with activity and I want people’s personal activity streams to remain a construct of their desire, as you stated. They key hurdle is accepting the concept that commenting on a group forum reply form an outside perspective such as the SWA doesn’t imply a desire to BE a part of that group. At least that’s how we view it. The other perspective also makes sense.

[r-a-y]

@Midwestbonsai

Why don’t you use the original version of the plugin for bbPress?

https://bbpress.org/plugins/topic/bb-attachments/

[midwestbonsai]

Will this work with an external install of bbpress?

[r-a-y]

Originally posted by Andy:

It may be worth considering disabling comments on these items and instead providing a link to be able to comment at the location of the original content.

I would like to see a BuddyPress admin option to disable activity commenting for components we deem not worthy of having it. I would use this option for blog comments and forum posts.

Although the “live” aspect wouldn’t be fostered, we should only have one focused stream for blog comments and forum posts, rather than the original stream (blog comment, forum replies) and a multiple activity comment stream.

To Bowe, Mike and whoever else is reading, I put up a ticket with this issue awhile ago – https://trac.buddypress.org/ticket/1419

Feel free to chime in.

—

The other issue raised by Mike of auto-joining a group on a forum reply is interesting. On testbp.org, I made a reply to a group forum post and thus, joined the group.

Then I visited my group activity stream and noticed these new group activity posts in my stream and said to myself “I don’t really want these items in my group stream!”.

So the issue is if you make a ton of group forum replies to groups that you’re not a member of, your personal group stream will become littered!

Mike, how do you plan on handling this on your BP site?

[Anton]

1. Which version of WPMU are you running? 2.86

2. Did you install WPMU as a directory or subdomain install? Sub directory

3. If a directory install, is it in root or in a subdirectory? root

4. Did you upgraded from a previous version of WPMU? If so, from which version? Nope. Fresh install.

5. Was WPMU functioning properly before installing/upgrading BuddyPress? Didn’t test WPMU on it’s own. Installed it to use BB

6. Which version of BuddyPress (BP) are you running? 1.13

7. Did you upgraded from a previous version of BP? If so, from which version? nope

8. Do you have any plugins other than BuddyPress installed and activated? Yes. deactivated them all and the problem(s) still occurs.

9. Are you using the standard BuddyPress themes or customized themes? Standard. Only edited the default css and added a couple of links.

10. Have you modified the core files in any way? Yes. The delete button next to the code is not working and If I add any chars to the delete string eg: http://socialpress.co.za/friends/activity/delete/123?_wpnonce=30864bbwe2 it does delete but not always. Some members can’t delete. The default delete string does not work. I have also added those same chars to the RSS site wide activity feed as the default one: http://socialpress.co.za/activity/feed doesn’t work.

11. Do you have any custom functions in bp-custom.php? nope

12. If running bbPress, which version? Or did your BuddyPress install come with a copy of bbPress built-in? 1.13

13. Please provide a list of any errors in your server’s log files

there’s quite allot of these

[12-Dec-2009 19:18:07] WordPress database error Table ‘socialpr_socialpress.wp_bp_activity_sitewide’ doesn’t exist for query SELECT COUNT(id) FROM wp_bp_activity_sitewide WHERE hide_sitewide = 0 ORDER BY date_recorded DESC made by require, require_once, include, bp_has_activities, BP_Activity_Template->bp_activity_template, bp_activity_get_sitewide_activity, BP_Activity_Activity->get_sitewide_activity

[12-Dec-2009 19:18:21] WordPress database error Table ‘socialpr_socialpress.wp_bp_activity_sitewide’ doesn’t exist for query SELECT * FROM wp_bp_activity_sitewide WHERE hide_sitewide = 0 ORDER BY date_recorded DESC LIMIT 0, 10 made by require, require_once, include, dynamic_sidebar, call_user_func_array, WP_Widget->display_callback, BP_Activity_Widget->widget, bp_has_activities, BP_Activity_Template->bp_activity_template, bp_activity_get_sitewide_activity, BP_Activity_Activity->get_sitewide_activity

[12-Dec-2009 19:18:21] WordPress database error Table ‘socialpr_socialpress.wp_bp_activity_sitewide’ doesn’t exist for query SELECT COUNT(id) FROM wp_bp_activity_sitewide WHERE hide_sitewide = 0 ORDER BY date_recorded DESC LIMIT 200 made by require, require_once, include, dynamic_sidebar, call_user_func_array, WP_Widget->display_callback, BP_Activity_Widget->widget, bp_has_activities, BP_Activity_Template->bp_activity_template, bp_activity_get_sitewide_activity, BP_Activity_Activity->get_sitewide_activity

[12-Dec-2009 19:18:21] WordPress database error Table ‘socialpr_socialpress.wp_bp_activity_sitewide’ doesn’t exist for query SELECT * FROM wp_bp_activity_sitewide WHERE hide_sitewide = 0 ORDER BY date_recorded DESC LIMIT 0, 10 made by require, require_once, include, bp_has_activities, BP_Activity_Template->bp_activity_template, bp_activity_get_sitewide_activity, BP_Activity_Activity->get_sitewide_activity

[12-Dec-2009 19:18:21] WordPress database error Table ‘socialpr_socialpress.wp_bp_activity_sitewide’ doesn’t exist for query SELECT COUNT(id) FROM wp_bp_activity_sitewide WHERE hide_sitewide = 0 ORDER BY date_recorded DESC made by require, require_once, include, bp_has_activities, BP_Activity_Template->bp_activity_template, bp_activity_get_sitewide_activity, BP_Activity_Activity->get_sitewide_activity

SHouldn’t there be a table wp_bp_activity_sitewide on the installation? I’ve looked in the db but it’s not there. I did the default installation.

.

14. Which company provides your hosting? Hostgator

[Mike Pratt]

I agree on the auto joining. It’s also a potentially very important distinction between what constitutes an “original posting” Is that “creating” a new topic in a Group forum? maybe that’s a good idea. group members can create new Topics but if you comment on the public SWA then you are adding to that forum thread.

Just remember, no one will make the distinction on their own…they will see a forum reply and see that they have the ability to add their own comment and will assume it’s part of the forum thread. Why would they assume otherwise.

I know it might be hard to sync. Bummer if we disable forum and blog in-line comments. That’s the coolest part of it all

[Bowe]

I think it would be best to indeed show a link to the topic and let users reply there.. if a user is not a member of the group but a message where the link would normally be:

“if you want to reply on this topic, please join the group first”

Or something like that

[Andy Peatling]

My take is that a public group is public. The group activity shows on the site wide activity stream because of that. You must be a group member to post an original update in the group, but you do not have to be a member of the group to leave your comment on something that is openly public.

A private/hidden group is different, the activity will not show on the site wide stream, so you will need to be a member to comment or even see the activity when you visit the group.

I think for now it’s going to be too messy to try and start auto-joining people or thinking about permissions even further. Not to say that this won’t be thought about in greater depth after 1.2.

I’m not sure exactly how to handle the syncing of forum replies and blog post comments with the activity stream. I don’t want to make the original source redundant. It may be worth considering disabling comments on these items and instead providing a link to be able to comment at the location of the original content.

[Mike Pratt]

I started a new thread to pick up where this one left off now that the new SWA has tweaked the model -> https://buddypress.org/forums/topic/new-12-swa-and-blogforum-syncing-feedback-needed

I will add one parting thought here-> IMHO, BP was a welcome change from the old bbPress way which tossed every topic imaginable into a big collection of forum topics. Groups are a way to aggregate subjects and such. I for one am glad there is no giant site wide forum that I have to wade through to find what I want. That’s why I join groups. I have the SWA to browse the entire site full of activity. Bonus

[fzeidan]

Well this discussion seems to have covered the topic well, but I wanted to voice my support of the idea of having a site wide forum with its own categories seperate from Groups.

Such forum can act as support and general discussion for the site away from the groups.

Would it be feasable to have a second bbPress install and use that for the site wide forum, or would that conflict with the bbPress already shipped due to tables and credentials?

[Andrea Rennick]

What about the other plugins you have?

See this post:

https://mu.wordpress.org/forums/topic/14142?replies=6#post-84068

[Jeff Sayre]

@Harry

Yes, my Privacy Component works just as I described. It is an advanced beta available for testing. See this thread for more details: https://buddypress.org/forums/topic/buddypress-privacy-component-an-update/page/3#post-30574

@David

I wouldn’t give users the option to set it to friends only. Or at least… I would like the site admin to have the ability to disable that option.

In my Privacy Component, the site admin can choose to disable this feature.

But, to get back on topic, I agree that the best solution is the one that requires the brunt of the filtering to be accomplished through invisible, behind-the-scenes techniques. Requiring users to prove that they are members and not bots should not be the first line of defense. I think it is okay, even necessary for registration purposes. But that is a one time occurrence. After that, the system should do more of the policing.

Concerning your second link above, perhaps we could create a new CAPTCHA that could harness the collective intelligence of site members to solve the Unified Field theory.

[Brajesh Singh]

well, can you explain form which version you upgraded.

there have been changes in the database schema for activity as far as I remember in bp 1.1(just 1 table now).So that may be a reason.

have a look here

https://buddypress.org/blog/news/buddypress-1-1-released/

and search the forum, you will see similar things already discussed.

[Jeff Sayre]

@Harry (a.k.a. stripedsquirrel)

I think a very good start is that you can only message your friends. Thought that this would be already ths case, that is why I wondered how we could get spammed?

See this discussion: https://buddypress.org/forums/topic/compose-message-send-to-username

Basically, the autocomplete message recipient list only autofills from your friends list. However, anyone can message any other individual via the “Send Message” button on user’s profile screen. All that is needed for a user to send a PM is that they have a member account and that they are logged in to the system.

On a related note, my Privacy Component does have an option to filter out the “Send Message” button, making it only visible to those you choose.

[Paul Wong-Gibbs]

Please look at https://buddypress.org/forums/topic/when-asking-for-support