Onboarding process for new member

Gemeinschaft
1

I’m considering migrating from Facebook Groups to a semi-private Discourse instance for an event series I help run. I have read the previous blog posts and Discourse posts about migrating from Facebook groups. However, I have some questions about the on-boarding process of new users, which might be mostly due to my unfamiliarity with the API.

Filtering incoming users

Probably the biggest advantage to Facebook is it’s ability to use a Facebook profile as a proxy of trust. Basically, you can gague how likely a person is to be a spammy jerk by:

  • How many friends they have
  • The other groups they’re a part of
  • Their geographical location
  • (hardcore mode) Getting them to fill out a form with basic questions

Is filling out a form as part of new user joining possible to implement in Discourse to accomplish the same thing? I think this might be possible by customizing the profile creation form?

Making users set up their email settings once accepted

Given I want people to get email notifications based off their geographical location, is it possible to make this part of their account creation process? For example, so that a person who lives in Waterloo isn’t subscribed to the event notifications from Tokyo and Taipei. I’m afraid of users being unable to figure out the category-specific email settings on their own. Also, I’d rather not have to make a how-to and make them read it.

1 „Gefällt mir“
Create a brief questionnaire for a new user signing-up in a private forum to help staff with the vetting process?
2

This does not really address all of your issues, but if you are concerned about filtering incoming users, then one of the many options is to disable local registration and only use Facebook / Twitter login.

This way you can still use Facebook as a proxy of trust.

Extreme? yes, but still possible, so I wanted to point it out.

With that being said, Discourse has some awesome anti-spam features built in, so you might end up being pleasantly surprised.

5 „Gefällt mir“
3

All valid points.

I guess I also want to filter for people who I don’t want at the events, but that hasn’t been a problem before, so maybe it’s an unfounded concern.

2 „Gefällt mir“
4

One thing you could do is make the candidate write a little bit about themselves and what they hope to get out of your community.

5 „Gefällt mir“
5

Discourse does a bunch of stuff to keep you from having to worry about spammy jerks. It does this by giving them limited access to start and requiring them to do stuff like read and interact with the site before gaining more privileges. Rather than guessing whether someone is a jerk based on some incomplete information, it bases the decision on their actual behavior.

You can manage people’s access to particular categories by having them join groups (which control access to categories). You can manage groups manually or by allowing people to request membership. You can assign anyone (not just admins and moderators) as a group owner to distribute the work of vetting people’s right to join a group.

There are some example plugins that will assign people to watch certain categories (and get event notifications) depending on their group, though these require modifying the plugin.

2 „Gefällt mir“
6

It looks like it hasn’t been mentioned yet: Discourse supports custom user fields, and they can be added to the registration page and required if wanted. Users can also require admin approval after registering before being given access, so that admins can review the form responses.

That said, I know very few sites that add mandatory fields to the registration page, and even fewer that use them to approve users joining. As Jay said Discourse does lots of stuff to protect you from spam. Registration flow changes should not be required.

5 „Gefällt mir“
7

Probably the easiest way to do this is to require a user field that has users select their geographic region. Then you can sort them into groups based on this response.

8

Ich habe dies in unserer Instanz bereits umgesetzt, aber wir haben ein ärgerliches (wenn auch relativ kleines) Problem: Die Benutzerfelder auf der /review-Seite sind nicht ordentlich angeordnet, wie es @eviltrout mit seiner guten Arbeit unter Custom User Field Enhancements vorgeschlagen hat. Das bedeutet, dass die relevanten Informationen für die Entscheidung über :+1: oder :-1: für unsere Moderatoren/Verwalter vergraben sind.

Es könnte sein, dass wir dies einfach für unsere Instanz hacken könnten (Hauptadministrator ist @pacharanero), aber ich vermute, dass dies eigentlich ein Problem für alle Discourse-Instanzen ist, die bei der Anmeldung eine Dateneingabe vorschreiben, um zu entscheiden, wer beitreten darf, oder dies zu kontrollieren.

2 „Gefällt mir“
9

Nur zur Klarstellung: Das Problem besteht darin, dass die Felder zwar angezeigt werden, aber bei der Überprüfung nicht in der richtigen Reihenfolge sind?

4 „Gefällt mir“
10

Ja – die Reihenfolge ist etwas zufällig und wird davon bestimmt, wann der Feldtitel zuletzt bearbeitet wurde.

2 „Gefällt mir“
11

Hey @markvanlan, das ist vielleicht eine kleine Aufgabe, die dir helfen könnte, dich etwas mit dem Frontend der Überprüfungsqueue vertraut zu machen. Kannst du sie zu deiner Liste hinzufügen? Danke.

7 „Gefällt mir“
13

@nathank Wir haben dieses Problem behoben. Wenn Sie auf die neueste Version aktualisieren, werden die Benutzerfelder korrekt sortiert.

9 „Gefällt mir“
14

Sieht großartig aus! Das ist eine enorme Verbesserung einer kleinen, aber wichtigen Funktion.

@eviltrout – die Reaktionsfähigkeit eures Teams ist unglaublich. Es ist so kraftvoll, für jemanden wie mich gehört zu werden; das zeigt, wie sehr ihr auch kleine Nutzer wie mich schätzt!!!

10 „Gefällt mir“