Hello i'm new to the forum.

I'have been playing for years with the free version of the brain and now i just became a pro user and I am very satisfy.[thumb]

Here a things anyway: Why is the "private" option in the thought not inherited by the next thoughts under it. I know that technically the fact that the brain in non linearly hierarchical per nature is problematic to program how can be a parent thought and how is a children thought.
But, they must be a better way then crawling through the brain? maybe "inheriting by default" option in preferences? And if there is a conflict rise in between thought... give the chooses to inherit from one of the parent?

This also could be extended to other characteristic of thought with option in preference to inherit thought type, links type...


Some views... but no answers. I guess the idea is not share by anyone?
Maybe is just me who need that...but anyway I think it could be a very big time saver...

Yeah, I would like this as well.

I regularly store pdf's of bank statements and stuff like that under a 'private' thought. Would be very handy if new child thoughts would inherit the tags and the private status of its parent.
PB user since 1998

Mind over matter?
I don't mind and it doesn't matter.
TB Pro on Win10.1 Pro 64bit JVM 1.8.0-112
I believe I asked for the same thing last year. Inheritance of parent status should be default IMO.
I'll make sure this idea is well documented and considered for a future build.  

Thank you,
No!  :-)

Was just coming to post on this exact issue and saw this thread.  Great timing. 

It's very easy to turn all the children of a private thought private, so making it a default for thoughts to simply inherit a parent's privacy status isn't really necessary.  And there are plenty of circumstances in which (for public Brains in particular) you want certain parent thoughts hidden but don't want all the child thoughts hidden.  So having it be a default would be problematic and confusing.  

The thing that IS a problem I would argue is that you shouldn't see sibling thoughts on the screen if the parent thought is private.  So it's a visibility issue rather than an attributes issue. 

Here's an example screen shot that is confusing.  You have a bunch of thoughts off to the right that look orphaned. 

apparent orphans.png 
They're not actually orphans.  But there is a hidden private thought.  The private thought can't be seen, but all the siblings are still visible.  That doesn't make sense because it's really confusing to the user.  It would be much better if those sibling thoughts simply didn't display given the private nature of the parent.  

private screenshot.png 
As I think about it I'm seeing that it might be difficult for the program to figure out which are the siblings to display, and which are the ones not to.  It's only the thoughts off to the right that are the problem, but don't know if that makes it easy to code in what's visible and what's not. 

Newsletter Signup  Newsletter        Visit TheBrain Blog   Blog       Follow us on Twitter   Twitter       Like Us on Facebook   Facebook         Watch Us on Youtube  YouTube       

TheBrain Mind Map & Mindmapping Software     Download TheBrain Mind Mapping Software