Question: Does the new forum still use StopForumSpam and CloudFlare spambot filters or just Bad Behavior?

Also the [suspicious] tags are a nice touch. This could become handy since the game walkthrough section could be made public but topic start content hidden to guests. They would have an idea of what walkthrough we have so far.

Aaah ok. That could explain why one or two bots slipped by a few days ago. I didn't realize that SFS wasn't 2.0.7 compatible. Have you tried the version emulation mode? (Although I recommend backing up first) Sometimes, there is no SMF change that will prevent a mod from working and the author might not immediately update his mod to include 2.0.7 in the compatibility list.

The only thing I dislike about Bad Behavior is its name: I wish they had called it in a way to imply that it's mainly to block spam. If someone gets blocked when signing up, if he sees "Bad Behavior has blocked 1628 access attempts in the last 7 days." at the bottom of the page and isn't familiar with spambots, he might think the admins are just ban freaks and manually ban most new users for no reason.

Maybe SMF2 is calculating the views differently?

Oooh I see now. That sucks. Good luck fixing it.

Hey, how's the attachment update going? As i understand, now only logged-in ppl can download. Is that the intended final solution? I mean, guest users can no longer see/download attachments, that will certainly decrease the # of downloads, 'cause some won't even bother to log-in.

PS: I miss the feature: who's reading the topic, 'cause it decreases user's interaction, imho.

Waiting for geekboy to review the permissions.

Send a request for the "who's reading the topic" feature to ourl.ca/request

Yeah, when United-TI made their attachments invisibile to guests, this caused a lot of backlash in the TI community and that reason alone was enough to make some people move their projects elsewhere. Since this is a permission issue, hopefully it can be fixed in the near future.

Fixed Already

I just got an idea about links being broken. I don't know how feasible it is though, I am not an expert at web.

Why not put the "new website" in a "new folder" and have all links to the "old folder" be redirected with an offset to the "new folder" ? This way, every link already written somewhere is still valid and every new link is too.

I just got an idea about links being broken. I don't know how feasible it is though, I am not an expert at web.

Why not put the "new website" in a "new folder" and have all links to the "old folder" be redirected with an offset to the "new folder" ? This way, every link already written somewhere is still valid and every new link is too.

I'm not going to be changing the folder structure of Omnimaga and adding junk to the urls. It looks unprofessional and it make maintaining the site that much more of a headache.