blocking plugin (or code/script) needed

[RichardInTN]

It seems so simple in English that I can't understand how it could be difficult in any programming language that allows for conditional checking.

Just write a small "if, then" such as the following {english language version} condition/action:

if post is by {member listed in key as blocked by user or blocked by moderator for user}, then this.post.display="no"

Obviously as I'm not 100% fluent in either Javascript, or PB Plugins... I may have gotten something wrong in that example, but I think the idea can be gleaned from it anyway.

[Kami]

Jun 9, 2017 20:45:52 GMT -8 RichardInTN said:

It seems so simple in English that I can't understand how it could be difficult in any programming language that allows for conditional checking.

Just write a small "if, then" such as the following {english language version} condition/action:

if post is by {member listed in key as blocked by user or blocked by moderator for user}, then this.post.display="no"

Obviously as I'm not 100% fluent in either Javascript, or PB Plugins... I may have gotten something wrong in that example, but I think the idea can be gleaned from it anyway.

It's not the conditional that is the problem.

Jun 9, 2017 18:13:30 GMT -8 @synthtec said:

The problem is with persisting data, it really is that simple. Proboards allows modifying frontend behaviors(html|css|javascript). It does not support backend communication via an API for persistent data

From my understanding, the problem is the data that you would wind up needing to send to the server. @synthtec correct me if i'm wrong but what i think this says is that because the blocking would need to be communicated to the server, the developer guidelines for PB probhibit such a behaviour.

You could use the existing block function to create a condition, but having a new block function would be an issue.

Again i'm just interpreting and could be wildly off haha

[RichardInTN]

Jun 9, 2017 20:51:32 GMT -8 Kami said:

Jun 9, 2017 20:45:52 GMT -8 RichardInTN said:

It seems so simple in English that I can't understand how it could be difficult in any programming language that allows for conditional checking.

Just write a small "if, then" such as the following {english language version} condition/action:Obviously as I'm not 100% fluent in either Javascript, or PB Plugins... I may have gotten something wrong in that example, but I think the idea can be gleaned from it anyway.

It's not the conditional that is the problem.

Jun 9, 2017 18:13:30 GMT -8 @synthtec said:

The problem is with persisting data, it really is that simple. Proboards allows modifying frontend behaviors(html|css|javascript). It does not support backend communication via an API for persistent data

From my understanding, the problem is the data that you would wind up needing to send to the server. @synthtec correct me if i'm wrong but what i think this says is that because the blocking would need to be communicated to the server, the developer guidelines for PB probhibit such a behaviour.

You could use the existing block function to create a condition, but having a new block function would be an issue.

Again i'm just interpreting and could be wildly off haha

But my Javascript-ish English version doesn't send anything to the server. It gets some data from the key, and then does all it's scripting wizardry after page-load is complete.

I already know it's possible to remove an entire post from being displayed (commenting out a few lines in all of my themes accomplished that feat) via coding... and just about anything that can be done in CSS can be changed via Javscript.

For example, on the first page of this thread, when I inspect the page using Chrome's "inspect" option, the first post you make is defined as "post-6981727". Javascript (if it a script was running and on the page and told it to after checking who posted "post-6981727", then cross referenced it via the "if" against the key's data) should be able to insert "visibility: hidden" into the page for just THAT post... because I know that it can be done because I just did it (manually, in the "inspect"s pop-up). or possibly using a "hide" option.


ETA: and "display: none" makes the post disappear entirely, doesn't just hide it leaving a large blank box (just tested that out after perusing some information about hiding things on the "StackOverflow" programming assistance website), so that would be even better than "visibility: hidden".

[Kami]

Shrug I was just trying to interpret what Phil was saying tbh. I also don't particularly see why something would need to get sent to the server.

Maybe @synthtec can elaborate when he's next online (:

[RichardInTN]

Jun 9, 2017 22:13:10 GMT -8 Kami said:

Shrug I was just trying to interpret what Phil was saying tbh. I also don't particularly see why something would need to get sent to the server.

Maybe @synthtec can elaborate when he's next online (:

He was (I believe) explaining why PHP wouldn't work... even if PB supported it.

That's how I understood it anyway, as PHP is server-side processed before the data is sent over the web.



Anyway, the PHP is a moot point. I only even looked into it because I mistakenly was mixing that up with the requirements for plugins to be in "pbp format"... saw "PHP" and had a brain fart "Hey, that's the format plugins use! (it's not, that was the brain fart) maybe someone can write it in that!".

[Kami]

Jun 9, 2017 22:43:07 GMT -8 RichardInTN said:

Jun 9, 2017 22:13:10 GMT -8 Kami said:

Shrug I was just trying to interpret what Phil was saying tbh. I also don't particularly see why something would need to get sent to the server.

Maybe @synthtec can elaborate when he's next online (:

He was (I believe) explaining why PHP wouldn't work... even if PB supported it.

That's how I understood it anyway, as PHP is server-side processed before the data is sent over the web.



Anyway, the PHP is a moot point. I only even looked into it because I mistakenly was mixing that up with the requirements for plugins to be in "pbp format"... saw "PHP" and had a brain fart "Hey, that's the format plugins use! (it's not, that was the brain fart) maybe someone can write it in that!".

Oh, maybe! He said API and the only API that PB supports is Javascript so I made an assumption that's what he was referring to.

[RichardInTN]

Bumping because bumping happens. (Especially when no one is brave enough to take up the challenge immediately!)

[Former Member]

I guess you could just hide the user(posts,pms). Although I'm pretty sure this is already built in.

This is what confused me:

I need a plugin that only Mods and Admin can access (it's fine if changes need to be made via the "Admin Control Panel") where we can cause members thread posts to be ignored by each other.

I was under the impression you wanted to share ignores with fellow admins. Hence the reference to PHP. As something like this could only be done server side, to persist the data to a DB.

[RichardInTN]

Jun 12, 2017 19:09:03 GMT -8 @synthtec said:

I guess you could just hide the user(posts,pms). Although I'm pretty sure this is already built in.

This is what confused me:

I need a plugin that only Mods and Admin can access (it's fine if changes need to be made via the "Admin Control Panel") where we can cause members thread posts to be ignored by each other.

I was under the impression you wanted to share ignores with fellow admins. Hence the reference to PHP. As something like this could only be done server side, to persist the data to a DB.

I agree ".hide" (or something like that) would probably work... but how and where and how to control it (so Member-A can't see Member-B and vice versa) is the question. It needs to be updatable. That's why it needs to be a plugin, not a bit of script on a theme or a header, or footer somewhere.

For clarity: Mods would still see all posts, just the members listed in each instance would be ignoring each other.

And all Admins could see who is being ignored via this plugin... all they'd have to do is go to the "manage plugins" section and open up it's "settings" tab to look.

ETA: Actually that gives me an idea. It would be nice if Admins & Mods could see a list of Admin blocked users, maybe on their own Profile page somewhere?

[RichardInTN]

Because bumping needs to happen occasionally...

[RichardInTN]

Bumping because I know there must be at least ONE coder that's up to the challenge!

[Former Member]

Like I said, this feature is already built in to proboards.

go to profile->edit_profile->privacy

[Kami]

Jun 18, 2017 6:00:14 GMT -8 @synthtec said:

Like I said, this feature is already built in to proboards.

go to profile->edit_profile->privacy

Er... no it's not? I mean no disrespect but this is not what the OP is requesting at all.

[Former Member]

Jun 18, 2017 6:27:11 GMT -8 Kami said:

Jun 18, 2017 6:00:14 GMT -8 @synthtec said:

Like I said, this feature is already built in to proboards.

go to profile->edit_profile->privacy

Er... no it's not? I mean no disrespect but this is not what the OP is requesting at all.

Then I'm not quite sure what the OP is asking for tbh.

[Kami]

Jun 18, 2017 9:18:13 GMT -8 @synthtec said:

Jun 18, 2017 6:27:11 GMT -8 Kami said:

Er... no it's not? I mean no disrespect but this is not what the OP is requesting at all.

Then I'm not quite sure what the OP is asking for tbh.

OP wants a blocking feature for staff to implement, that would work to block person a and person b from seeing each other.

With the default PB function, I can block Bob via settings so that I do not see Bobs posts, quotes, and tags involving me, and so Bob cannot PM me.

What OP wants is for staff to be able to prevent me and Bob from seeing each other, presumably because we are bickering and will not cease and desist, and therefore the choice is wrested from our hands.

(As an aside the merits and demerits of this system have already been discussed and do not be to rehashed).