Add-on Approval Queue Improvements

Semper Fidelis

Active member
For moderated forums, current approval queue for applicants allows three options: Approve, Spam Clean, and Reject with Reason.

I'd like to have a fourth option for "Communicate with Applicant" or something similar.

When an applicant is rejected, the user remains in the system with a User State: Rejected.

About 30% of the time we have applicants who provide insufficient information. When we "Reject" the application it communicates to them that their account is rejected and no longer accessible along with a reason for rejection. We currently communicate that they can respond to our concerns via the Contact Form with clarifying information. We can then change their state to Awaiting Approval and approve the applicant.

I think an Addon that split rejections between firm and soft rejections would be nice. Allow the mods to reject and delete some applicants (rather than just leeaving thm in the DB) while allow them to interact with others until they provide clarifying information.
 
I'd like to have a fourth option for "Communicate with Applicant" or something similar.
How this option should work? Please explain with user example
I would add a fourth option: "Moderate Application" and then provide a text box that allowed the moderators to send the applicant the problem with his application. It would send an email letting him know that his application needs to be updated with a link to the profile where he can log in and make the necessary changes. Once the changes have been made it is submitted and a new alert goes to the moderators to approve or reject.

I would change the Reject User option to add another checkbox to delete the user profile as part of the rejection process.

Thus a workflow could look something like this:

1. Applicant applies.
2. Mods notice something isn't right about applicant. They select "Moderate Application" and provide the user with the reason why is application is not yet approved and needs to be fixed.
3. Email sent to user with reasons application is being moderated. He clicks on link, which takes him to his profile.
4. He makes the necessary changes and saves.
5. I'm a bit fuzzy about how the saving of the profile is recognized as a trigger that the applicant has made the changes that triggers him back into the Approval Queue.
6. Applicant shows back up in the Approval Queue as Moderated Applicant letting Mods know the applicant has updated stuff.
7. If application is still insufficient it goes back to Step 2.
8. If application is good then application is approved.
9. If application is just not going to be the right fit then Reject User with option to delete from the system.

When moderators select " Reject with Reason" we should give them options either they want to hard delete it or soft delete right?

Yes, in fact, if you only make that improvement that would be really nice to have it as an option. I don't want to hard delete all rejected applicants but some I do.
 
Thanks, Everything is making complete sense and i have started a private conversation to discuss further.
 
I love this idea. Sometimes, we'll reject a use because of his chosen username or some other reason. We'd be happy to have him once the issue is cured. But as I understand it (you'll find this NOWHERE in the official user manual, and I cannot tell you how much time I spend trying to find the answers to the simplest of questions), if you reject with reason, they become invalid and cannot fix whatever the issue is. I'd like to see what's outlined above with the additional option of hard delete with reason. Why? Let's say the new user is using a VPN we don't like, for whatever reason. Currently, we can either reject with reason (which puts them into never-neverland), or, we can take the extra step of then going into their account and hard-deleting them so they can cure themselves and reapply. That extra step is a PITA when you have a bunch of folks to approve. OTOH, if we use an add-on like Approval Queue Improvements, yes, we can hard-delete with fewer steps, but the user never knows what happened.

Has there been progress on this, ForumCube?
 
Top Bottom