Question Feature request: Handle SPAM via forum members

Thank you,
they dont report to moderator now,because i will report them after :evil: ,
but IF the post will unpublish then it will be a mess, all will start.

Posts and reviews if you ask how helpfull or liked they are ,
they vote by friendship.

ruud wrote: What do you think?

This topic is posted in the category Kunena 4.0 Feature Requests . In my opinion there should be no "new features" added to K 4.0 at this time,

There should be a lesson here for the developers about the experience of (a) requesting new features and (b) adding new features.

In the "old days" there was a forum category here where people could suggest new ideas for new features. For some unexplained reason, the developers added a new category for people to request new features in K 4.0. I do not understand the reason why the developers created a new forum category for these things when a forum category already existed. However, that's the fact of the matter and it's something that has already caused a lot of confusion.

The second point I want to make about "reguesting" new features to be added to K 4.0 is that it created a number of false expectations within the community. The category Kunena 4.0 Feature Requests was created after the initial beta release of K 4.0. Now, perhaps I misunderstand the meaning of the term " beta version " but it has been my belief that, when a software project reaches the beta phase,

... the software is feature complete but likely to contain a number of known or unknown bugs.

We should also remember that the alpha phase—the initial design and construction) of the K 4.0 feature set—took nearly two years to complete. According to the developers' own plan, K 4.0 is already at end-of-life pending the release of K 5.0. The question therefore remains, why request new features for K 4.0 at this stage?

So, for these reasons, I would argue that this forum category called Kunena 4.0 Feature Requests has already served its purpose and the category should be locked. If the developers think there's some benefit in asking the community for suggestions for K 5.0 then, perhaps, it would be an idea to create a new forum category for that?

Secondly, we have already witnessed the dangers of adding adding new features. With each minor dot-point release of K 4.0—with the exception of K 4.0.7—new features were added and new defects were introduced. Parts of Kunena that used to work in older version were broken in new releases. Some of the new features did not work, either, or they introduced new problems. Although the ideas for new features are good, the consequences of adding new features is disastrous. Adding new features has caused a loss in confidence within the community about the stability of the product.

I believe the developers should focus their activities on (a) rectifying known problems and, if necessary, removing those "new features" that were added after K 4.0 beta was released if those additions created additional problems, and (b) developing K 5.0 and the appropriate support mechanisms (i.e. documentation, website) that users require.

In conclusion:

a) the time for requesting new features for K 4.0 is over and I suggest that this category should be locked and archived for posterity.

b) instead of strengthing the community's involvement, adding new features in K 4.0 results in the community's loss of confidence in the product.

And, in answer to your question, that's what I think.

Thanks Sozzled for sharing your thoughts

I trust the developers and the community to do what they feel needs and can be done.
For what it's worth: Reason for me to have a regained confidence in Kunena is because of the developers doing their best on implementing new features and fixing bugs.
Will there be errors and bugs? I really hope so: not for bashing the developers afterwards, but for kicking my own bud in not helping them enough with testing > creating bug free software is a community effort. (same applies to documentation )

If my request is misplaced into the wrong forum category, feel free to move it to the correct one.