When a forum is locked all aspects of the forum should be locked to all. Not just some aspects. You can change your signature. This is a place where cheap shots can be taken or things taken out of context. This is a common practice of some posters. Either lock it or not. Let's freeze everything. Signatures and Avatars and anything else that can be edited.

I'm not sure if your talking about your own forums and this is a feature you would like to see added to newbb in general, or if there is a problem here on the XOOPS forums themselves. If it's the former, there may not be much you can do except disable signatures and avatars. If indeed it is the latter case, then please read on.

Signatures and avatars are global. I understand your frustration, but it would be near impossible to lock a persons avatar or signature. The signature and Avatar are controled from the User Account, not the forum or post where they made their comments from. The forum is only a means for displaying those items.

When a forum is locked, the only thing that should (or can)be locked is the content of the posts. I do not know if a person can go in and edit a post once a thread is locked, but if one can, then maybe it's something that should be looked into a little further. If this is the case, please let us know.

Taking things out of context is easy and can usualy be fixed by the involved parties themselves. However it's a shame when it gets out of hand simply because of a misunderstanding. It's happened to me once or twice.

Cheap shots however should be taken with a grain of salt. If it needs to get that personal, then maybe it's time to move on to another post, or take it up in private. If the two (or more) disagreeing parties can not resolve their issue, then a moderator may have to step in. Petty bickering, although frowned upon, is an inevitabilty at times. We all need to excersise patience, myself included at times.

In any case, it is usualy encouraged that users take their personal matters to Private Messages. It's rarely a problem in this community where moderation needs to be strictly applied. The community at large is for the most part, fair and good to each other.

*Edit*

And realizing that your post was made in the module request section, I guess I ran off a little too much. A perfect example of something taken out of context

Sorry Chief!
(It's all good advice for others reading as well, so I'll keep my post going as is)

This is a general request for a feature of newbb.
Its certainly is not impossible.

When locking a forum is used as a form of censureship. It is only fair to lock all aspects of it.

It's impossible insofar that the signatures are added dynamically, based on the poster's ID, and not added to the actual post text. So locking a forum doesn't lock a users signature, or even all posters' signatures in that thread. What can be a feature tho, is that signatures are disabled when a thread is locked. That way the signatures can't be used to continue tha thread or give it another spin. But you can do that manually yourself in the edit forum section of the newbb admin. I presume you don't have to close that many threads that doing this manually will be a big problem. But, it can be a feature for newbb You can add the feature request on the XOOPS Development Forge page for the newbb project: http://dev.xoops.org/modules/xfmod/tracker/?group_id=1001&atid=107

Herko

It says you have to register as a developer to enter a requested feature.

@Herko
The problem with controlling signatures as you suggested will result in turning off all signatures in that forum. Each forum may have many threads. It would be unfair to disable signatures for all threads.

It seem a fairly simple task to freeze a thread. I can do it. However I would not be able to update with new releases.
That is the major problem with hacks.
I never implement a core or module hack for this reason.
When you have many sites and clients this can become an overwhelming task.
If it can not be altered in a template then it is best left alone in my opinion

You say it's simple to freeze a thread, but the signatures are NOT added to the newbb_posts_text table, they are dynamically called by an SQL query and only added to the posts when viewing the posts themself. This scheme prevents signatures to be stored hundreds or thousands of times in the database, while they change very little, plus, when they change, they all change (which is a good thing IMHO).
There are two ways to look at this: either you change the whole forum builup routine by adding the signatures to the forum text, or you find a way to disable the signatures for a specific thread only. This last option seems to me to be the most realistic.

Contact Predator about the feature addition. ANd/or use the project forum to discuss this feature.

Herko

@Herko

A locked forum is a unique event.
The scheme would be to capture only the signatures, posts and avatars from the locked forum. It would not be necessary to store hundreds or thousands unless the thread was that long.

That would mean you move the locked forum to a new database table, with all the additional info added to every post (even avatar -stored in the db?). This would not be so eality made )well, Predator can do it quick, but he's the Expert on this ). Do you also want to freeze the user rank, posts, location etc.?

But why do you want to freeze it? Isn't removing the signatures enough? Because you can exclude that part of the query if the thread is locked... ANd if the only reason is to stop people from abusing their signatures, then this would be sufficient, IMHO.

Herko

No removing the signature is not the answer.

Signature control is not granular enought to disable it on one thread only.

All information is already in database and need not be duplicated. It is not necessary to capture any other variable in user profile as they are not reflected in the discussion.
Avatar and signature would be sufficient. Once a forum is locked nothing else can be edited to change the context except these two items.

SIgnature control can be made granular enough to disable them in locked threads. That shouldn't be too hard, since it's just adding a condition to the existing query. I'd prefer that option before moving the thread to a new table with the signature added to the post text (as it increases the number of queries dramatically).

Herko