Add a Login variable to newsletter

[katrinak]

Hi,

I was really disappointed to find there was no login variable available for inclusion in my newsletters.

I understand that the users email address can be used... but it seems the login/username (as opposed to display name) has some benefits.

I noticed a similar thread going back to 2010 discussing this, and find it hard to believe something that would be so obvious and useful woulnd't have been implemented by now.

Perhaps there's something I'm missing... something behind the scenes that would make this very difficult to provide...?

If not, i hope you can add it to a future version. It would be great.

Meanwhile, the forum is absolutely fantastic.

Katrina

Here is a link to my original post which explains my reasoning:

http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=488739.0

[Arantor]

I understand that the users email address can be used... but it seems the login/username (as opposed to display name) has some benefits.

What benefits, exactly?

The user can use either without any noticeable difference from their perspective.

Perhaps there's something I'm missing... something behind the scenes that would make this very difficult to provide...?

You mean other than the fact the developers don't like adding in features unnecessarily?

[katrinak]

Personally, i find entering marissa.v much easier than typing in a long email address. My efforts were to make everything as EASY as possible for my members, and that included pre-customising their accounts with their photos, display names and logins from the get go. When you have a lot of people who are not that computer literate, it helps. Ultimately, however, it's not that huge a deal.

Also, what kindred mentioned (in the last thread) about security being a factor, was something i hadn't considered. So that makes a lot of sense to me now. A definite reason being offered in that way makes much more sense to me than "other people don't do it the way you do".

As for the developers not wanting to do extra work for no good reason... of course not. But without good reason being explained to me, I would assume it was something complicated that stops what 'appeared' to be a decent function from being implemented.

In the long run, while I immensely appreciate the FREE support that so many of you offer, and think the software is ultimately great, I'm a little confused to why anyone would even waste their  time even replying to my query if they thought my being blind to the obvious was... stupid? Your tone seems a little condescending is all... but it's hard to read tone from online text, so...?

"It's a security issue to include logins in emails, and therefore those variables are not included so as not to encourage bad practices" makes immediate sense to me.

[Arantor]

Personally, I use my browser to store it for me through the magic of autocomplete, when I'm not 'logged in forever'...

It's a security issue to include logins in emails, and therefore those variables are not included so as not to encourage bad practices

That would be fine if it weren't pretty much completely incorrect.

The email address substitutes for the user name. If you know the email address you can log in anyway, so there's absolutely no security implications - you don't *need* a username. The username's existence is mostly for user convenience, not anything else.

What we're back to is that the newsletters were never designed with 'oh hey, you're already registered, here's your details' notification. In fact, there is actually a mechanism in SMF for that already, when you register a user from the admin panel manually, you can email them there and then with their new details.

They're designed for regular updates and news, and ultimately with that in mind there is absolutely no need to include the username, because the only name that a regular news update needs to have is the one the user is currently using.

In your example, you wouldn't normally send a monthly newsletter update to include the user's login name, you'd use their display name to personalise it.

Your tone seems a little condescending is all... but it's hard to read tone from online text, so...?

It's not intentionally condescending. It's more the fact that I'm a veteran programmer and see things much in terms of absolutes and 'how they are' rather than wasting time pretending to be nicer than I actually am (because contrary to what anyone here tells you, I'm not really a nice person), and that I have an instant frustration response to the feeling of explaining something multiple times.

[katrinak]

Well, it was kindred who said it was security issue. (I compared it to the use of emails and it didn't seem to make much sense either... but hey...)

There were plenty reasons i didn't want the user to be notified of their account on creation... and reasons for the way I've done things. Simply using their email address will do the trick and I'm happy. Using the newsletter in the way I am using it, works for me too. If it's unique and/or a curious method. So be it. Doesn't harm anyone and gets the job done better than any other way i can think of, in my case. I don't feel the need to explain it all any more than i think you should have to explain anything multiple times to me. It's frustrating, I agree.

You seem to have the impression that I think the world revolves around me and my needs.  I merely requested a feature on the chance that others might have requested it too. To add my two cents if it was worth anything. Can't usually be bothered to even do that, but once in a blue moon I do.