# HTML capabilities for GOLD members



## Joshua (Aug 21, 2008)

*Should GOLD members have ability to post HTML code in the journal section?*​
Yes - HTML capabilities will enrich our experience with prettier journals. 2985.29%No - We don't need no pesky HTML514.71%


----------



## Joshua (Aug 21, 2008)

I raised an issue with the boss regarding the posting of HTML code within journals.



> YouTube embedding will be sorted as soon as we upgrade to vBulletin 4 which is getting closer by the day.. I think I originally said around Mid March so almost there.
> 
> As for HTML code, enabling for GOLD members could be done. If you post a poll about it in the suggestions forum and the majority of GOLD members are in favour then I'll do it.
> 
> L


If a majority of GOLD members vote for this then L said that he will introduce it.

Thanks,

J


----------



## M_at (May 2, 2009)

I'll vote in a few months then...


----------



## Khaos1436114653 (Aug 28, 2009)

M_at said:


> I'll vote in a few months then...


me too


----------



## Nemises (Jun 29, 2008)

What is the benifit? What will it allow you to do?


----------



## Joshua (Aug 21, 2008)

My particular desire is to use it for using tables in posts in my journal, improving the formatting for training and diet information. It would also look a bit more colourful.

J


----------



## Jem (Mar 5, 2009)

yup sounds good to moi !


----------



## IanStu (Apr 12, 2009)

why only gold members?


----------



## Rob68 (Sep 16, 2008)

IanStu said:


> why only gold members?


Keeps out the riff-raff....


----------



## IanStu (Apr 12, 2009)

RJ68 said:


> Keeps out the riff-raff....


well thats clearly not true, as your skeletal presence adequately proves :stuart:


----------



## Joshua (Aug 21, 2008)

IanStu said:


> why only gold members?


L suggested that there were concerns with it being abused, so I suggested gold membership as a criteria as there is less likelihood of it being abused for span and other dodgyness, if the member has invested a substantial amount of time here.

J


----------



## Lorian (Apr 9, 2003)

IanStu said:


> why only gold members?


Allowing HTML code in posts carries with it a significant security risk.

Therefore, as a potentially dangerous 'feature' it would need to be restricted to the people with a proven post history and who are well known on the board.

BTW, you're only a few weeks off GOLD 

L


----------



## Lorian (Apr 9, 2003)

Joshua said:


> L suggested that there were concerns with it being abused, so I suggested gold membership as a criteria as there is less likelihood of it being abused for span and other dodgyness, if the member has invested a substantial amount of time here.
> 
> J


Ah, I missed your post before replying.

But yeah, spot on.

L


----------



## Joshua (Aug 21, 2008)

Lorian said:


> Allowing HTML code in posts carries with it a significant security risk.
> 
> Therefore, as a potentially dangerous 'feature' it would need to be restricted to the people with a proven post history and who are well known on the board.
> 
> ...


If this does get introduced, could you spell out any restrictions on things that you do not want people to do with it, so that we do not inadvertently expose the board to risk.

Cheers,

J


----------



## SALKev (Feb 28, 2009)

Would that not, in essence, be telling them what to do also?


----------



## gerg (Aug 17, 2008)

i presume any html posting would be sanity checked anyway, to stop missing tags messing up the page etc

i have found myself in the past wondering why i couldn't embed youtube videos in my journal, though i stopped updating that :S


----------



## IanStu (Apr 12, 2009)

Joshua said:


> L suggested that there were concerns with it being abused, so I suggested gold membership as a criteria as there is less likelihood of it being abused for span and other dodgyness, if the member has invested a substantial amount of time here.
> 
> J





Lorian said:


> Allowing HTML code in posts carries with it a significant security risk.
> 
> Therefore, as a potentially dangerous 'feature' it would need to be restricted to the people with a proven post history and who are well known on the board.
> 
> ...


Hope it happens, seems like a good idea and yes I guess there would be a security concern so I understand the gold thing :thumbup1:

Lorian if you read this have you any plans to let us have signatures back in our posts, they got removed a while back, I notice the mods still have em  maybe that could also just be for gold members in order to cut down the risk of people just using it for advertising.


----------



## Joshua (Aug 21, 2008)

SALKev said:


> Would that not, in essence, be telling them what to do also?


I think it depends how it is written. All I was thinking of was a list of any tags that we should not use, rather than a step by step list of vulnerabilities.

Part of the protection with restricting the capabilities to gold members would be that only these people could exploit the vulnerabilities and hopefully gold members would not do so. They have invested more of their time and effort into the site and would have more to lose by disregarding the rules.

J


----------



## corbuk (Jan 18, 2008)

yea i think its a good idea

_________________________________________

Hi.


----------



## SALKev (Feb 28, 2009)

Joshua said:


> I think it depends how it is written. All I was thinking of was a list of any tags that we should not use, rather than a step by step list of vulnerabilities.
> 
> Part of the protection with restricting the capabilities to gold members would be that only these people could exploit the vulnerabilities and hopefully gold members would not do so. They have invested more of their time and effort into the site and would have more to lose by disregarding the rules.
> 
> J


If it's as you have described, I'm all for it.


----------



## Lorian (Apr 9, 2003)

Sorry guys, I just went to enable this only to discover that it cannot actually be done.

I was convinced there was an option that would allow me to grant it based on usergroup but it related to something else.

It may be the case that, when we upgrade to vBulletin 4, I can obtain a module/plugin that will enable me to do it.

At the moment though it needs to remain on the wishlist.

L


----------



## Zara-Leoni (Mar 12, 2007)

Lorian said:


> Sorry guys, I just went to enable this only to discover that it cannot actually be done.
> 
> I was convinced there was an option that would allow me to grant it based on usergroup but it related to something else.
> 
> ...


How is it we can embed videos in every other section then???? :confused1:


----------



## Lorian (Apr 9, 2003)

Zara-Leoni said:


> How is it we can embed videos in every other section then???? :confused1:


My reply above was about enabling HTML in posts.. which is different from enabling embedding of youtube (or other) videos.

Embedding videos should be the same for every section, and should be working now. If not, send me a link to the thread where you can't embed and I'll test it.

L


----------

