|
|
Post by ???DaddyIndica on Jun 13, 2020 14:34:57 GMT
I read a few of the posts on this thread and I have a few things to say before I make my vote.
The person who is claiming that admins can not be or should not be trusted with the ability to add people to MB is the same person who has never joined the server to see how the admins actually administrate. Unlike popular belief, admins do not go around willynilly adding people to admin, and I’m confident they won’t add people to MB unless they are in fact a verified MB. Also, most people are forgetting the main part of this suggestion. You can’t say that only the ECD should be able to add people to MB when in most cases the ECD is not here/cannot be here immediately to add them to MB. MB is almost entirely just a title (I don’t mean this offensively, the builds are cool but I say this in relation to permissions) it is not like setting someone to the Owner rank. Admins are almost always available, and can be trusted with this permission. I did vote senior admins only, but now that I’ve thought about it I believe that it should be telnet+.
|
|
Geek
Veteran Member
Posts: 1,372
| Likes: 1,104
|
Post by Geek on Jun 13, 2020 15:22:31 GMT
I see no issue with allowing telnets to add people to MB who are already MB on the forums. This isn't about deciding who is suitable for a rank. This is about adding someone in-game who already has a rank. I would be more concerned if we couldn't trust even senior admins to do this.
|
|
Wild1145
Forum Admin 
Inactive Player & Inactive Senior Admin
Posts: 10,414
| Likes: 9,680
Member is Staff. Need immediate assistance? Send a PM
|
Post by Wild1145 on Jun 13, 2020 18:21:36 GMT
^ This... To have other people doing it literally defeats the point of the executive designer... How? So I suspect I've mis-understood. If this is simply re-adding those who are imposters / approved, then it should be the same as for admins. If this (And this is what I understood it to be) about who is actually a MB or not then my point stands. |
|
Wild1145
Forum Admin
Inactive Player & Inactive Senior Admin
Posts: 10,414
| Likes: 9,680
Member is Staff. Need immediate assistance? Send a PM
|
Post by Wild1145 on Jun 13, 2020 18:22:06 GMT
^ This... To have other people doing it literally defeats the point of the executive designer... What? The point of the executive designer is leading projects and I guess as well approving applications. Adding people to the list in-game isn’t the point of him. We allow Telnets and up to be able to add people to the admin list, which then have access to Adminworld and all other stuff (banning admins). Masterbuilders is a way smaller thing, they have access to a world which if they’d grief, we can roll it back in seconds. Except for that they get a title in-game, as well as that we can’t even add them when they’re offline. Adding people to the admin list can cause way more problems than to the MB list, why I don’t see why we can’t trust telnets and up with this. Think I've cleared this up on my reply but let me know if I haven't. |
|
Darth
Veteran Member
Server Liaison
Posts: 2,534
| Likes: 1,826
|
Post by Darth on Jun 13, 2020 18:24:26 GMT
So I suspect I've mis-understood. If this is simply re-adding those who are imposters / approved, then it should be the same as for admins. If this (And this is what I understood it to be) about who is actually a MB or not then my point stands. No, this is about the actual rank in-game. The ECD and their assistant(s) should be the only ones who can officially approve or deny MB applications, but more people should have access to the /mbconfig command in-game. |
|
Wild1145
Forum Admin
Inactive Player & Inactive Senior Admin
Posts: 10,414
| Likes: 9,680
Member is Staff. Need immediate assistance? Send a PM
|
Post by Wild1145 on Jun 13, 2020 18:44:26 GMT
So I suspect I've mis-understood. If this is simply re-adding those who are imposters / approved, then it should be the same as for admins. If this (And this is what I understood it to be) about who is actually a MB or not then my point stands. No, this is about the actual rank in-game. The ECD and their assistant(s) should be the only ones who can officially approve or deny MB applications, but more people should have access to the /mbconfig command in-game. Ahh apologies, had clearly skim read too little. Yeah, makes sense to me to have the ability to manage admins and the ability to manage MB's restricted in the same sorta way... |
|
|
|
Post by Polaris Seltzeris on Jun 13, 2020 19:37:22 GMT
A database isn't something which is only accessible when a person is online, as it already is it's possible to do it since it's a database, and you can make it even easier through an optimization which would take less than 2 minutes to add which would allow you to do it for offline players. That said, I do notice a consistency in that we can't add people to MB/Admin list while the target is offline. Why is that? The reason it has always been this way is that the current system does not support admin or master builder entries with no trusted IPs, which would be the case if you were to add someone for the first time while they aren't online. Fixing this would already alleviate the biggest reason this thread was created, which is that Miwo is not available 24/7 to wait for new master builders to join the game. Again, an easily fixed technical issue. We use a database, we already have the ability to see what IP addresses we would add, it would be a 2 minute optimization to make it work for offline players. Just because something has been in place for years or would require some easy optimizations to work in a more ideal way isn't an excuse to be illogical. |
|
|
|
Post by Polaris Seltzeris on Jun 13, 2020 19:42:41 GMT
No, this is about the actual rank in-game. The ECD and their assistant(s) should be the only ones who can officially approve or deny MB applications, but more people should have access to the /mbconfig command in-game. Ahh apologies, had clearly skim read too little. Yeah, makes sense to me to have the ability to manage admins and the ability to manage MB's restricted in the same sorta way... I agree with being consistent with how ranks are managed. My point is that we've been doing this in a very strange way to begin with, what online place in general allows their moderators to make other people moderators? No, you use a permissions system in which only the person in charge of adding moderators has that permission. My simple suggestion is that only the EAO can add people to the admin database, and only the ECD can add people to the master builder database, it's not complex and makes a whole lot more fucking sense than letting Telnets+ do that. Not a single person responding has made a coherent argument as to why Telnets+ in particular should be allowed to do this as opposed to the executive positions in charge or even why super admins shouldn't be able to do the same exact thing, after all telnet admin is just super admin + console access. |
|
|
|
Post by Polaris Seltzeris on Jun 13, 2020 19:50:02 GMT
I see no issue with allowing telnets to add people to MB who are already MB on the forums. This isn't about deciding who is suitable for a rank. This is about adding someone in-game who already has a rank. I would be more concerned if we couldn't trust even senior admins to do this. But it isn't. The same commands in question allow you to add anybody as a master builder or admin, and I see zero coherent argument why Telnets+ in particular should have that permission. My simple belief is that only the ECD/EAO should be able to add new people to the master builder and admin ranks respectively, and in the case of imposter verification, any super admin or master builder should be able to verify them (which is not adding somebody new, it's just an update to the database which I have zero issue with). |
|
Darth
Veteran Member
Server Liaison
Posts: 2,534
| Likes: 1,826
|
Post by Darth on Jun 13, 2020 19:52:57 GMT
Ahh apologies, had clearly skim read too little. Yeah, makes sense to me to have the ability to manage admins and the ability to manage MB's restricted in the same sorta way... I agree with being consistent with how ranks are managed. My point is that we've been doing this in a very strange way to begin with, what online place in general allows their moderators to make other people moderators? No, you use a permissions system in which only the person in charge of adding moderators has that permission. My simple suggestion is that only the EAO can add people to the admin database, and only the ECD can add people to the master builder database, it's not complex and makes a whole lot more fucking sense than letting Telnets+ do that. Not a single person responding has made a coherent argument as to why Telnets+ in particular should be allowed to do this as opposed to the executive positions in charge or even why super admins shouldn't be able to do the same exact thing, after all telnet admin is just super admin + console access. We've all given arguments as to why - I think a better question is, WHY would you not let Telnets+ do that? This whole point is simply a non-issue, but you are making it one. It's already been made very clear that only the EAO can appoint people as admin - and telnet admins are only permitted to add people that are already admin, and only remove someone in the case of an emergency. This has never actually been a problem, and I see no reason to fix something that isn't broken. If you have some server experience of telnets adding random people in the last five years, then please feel free to let me know. |
|
|
|
Post by Polaris Seltzeris on Jun 13, 2020 19:57:23 GMT
I agree with being consistent with how ranks are managed. My point is that we've been doing this in a very strange way to begin with, what online place in general allows their moderators to make other people moderators? No, you use a permissions system in which only the person in charge of adding moderators has that permission. My simple suggestion is that only the EAO can add people to the admin database, and only the ECD can add people to the master builder database, it's not complex and makes a whole lot more fucking sense than letting Telnets+ do that. Not a single person responding has made a coherent argument as to why Telnets+ in particular should be allowed to do this as opposed to the executive positions in charge or even why super admins shouldn't be able to do the same exact thing, after all telnet admin is just super admin + console access. We've all given arguments as to why - I think a better question is, WHY would you not let Telnets+ do that? This whole point is simply a non-issue, but you are making it one. It's already been made very clear that only the EAO can appoint people as admin - and telnet admins are only permitted to add people that are already admin, and only remove someone in the case of an emergency. This has never actually been a problem, and I see no reason to fix something that isn't broken. If you have some server experience of telnets adding random people in the last five years, then please feel free to let me know. Okay, please read what I'm saying. Nobody on this thread has said that you shouldn't be able to verify people that are already admin, I am saying that admins and master builders should not be able to add people in general to the database, there is a difference between the words "add" and "update." I support super admins and master builders being able to verify others (not Telnet+ because that is extremely arbitrary, any admin/master builder), and I support only the executive positions in charge of each rank having access to add new people to those databases. If your argument is that only the EAO can appoint people as an admin, then why are you so vehemently against only them having the ability to actually do that? It makes literally no sense to me. |
|
Darth
Veteran Member
Server Liaison
Posts: 2,534
| Likes: 1,826
|
Post by Darth on Jun 13, 2020 19:59:45 GMT
We've all given arguments as to why - I think a better question is, WHY would you not let Telnets+ do that? This whole point is simply a non-issue, but you are making it one. It's already been made very clear that only the EAO can appoint people as admin - and telnet admins are only permitted to add people that are already admin, and only remove someone in the case of an emergency. This has never actually been a problem, and I see no reason to fix something that isn't broken. If you have some server experience of telnets adding random people in the last five years, then please feel free to let me know. Okay, please read what I'm saying. Nobody on this thread has said that you shouldn't be able to verify people that are already admin, I am saying that admins and master builders should not be able to add people in general to the database, there is a difference between the words "add" and "update." I support super admins and master builders being able to verify others (not Telnet+ because that is extremely arbitrary, any admin/master builder), and I support only the executive positions in charge of each rank having access to add new people to those databases. If your argument is that only the EAO can appoint people as an admin, then why are you so vehemently against only them having the ability to actually do that? It makes literally no sense to me. Because it's been made extremely clear that ONLY people who have admin status on the forums (which itself is granted by EAO) may be added in any way, shape, or form. And telnets have always adhered to this rule, so I see no reason to change it beyond your personal philosophy that I (and many others) disagree with. |
|
|
|
Post by Polaris Seltzeris on Jun 13, 2020 20:02:18 GMT
Okay, please read what I'm saying. Nobody on this thread has said that you shouldn't be able to verify people that are already admin, I am saying that admins and master builders should not be able to add people in general to the database, there is a difference between the words "add" and "update." I support super admins and master builders being able to verify others (not Telnet+ because that is extremely arbitrary, any admin/master builder), and I support only the executive positions in charge of each rank having access to add new people to those databases. If your argument is that only the EAO can appoint people as an admin, then why are you so vehemently against only them having the ability to actually do that? It makes literally no sense to me. Because it's been made extremely clear that ONLY people who have admin status on the forums (which itself is granted by EAO) may be added in any way, shape, or form. And telnets have always adhered to this rule, so I see no reason to change it beyond your personal philosophy that I (and many others) disagree with. Your logic is equivalent to setting up a command, making a rule that only certain people should ever use this command, but vehemently refusing to actually limit the permission. Why do we need an honor system for the sake of having an honor system other than "hey, 99% of the time telnets honor the rule"? |
|
Darth
Veteran Member
Server Liaison
Posts: 2,534
| Likes: 1,826
|
Post by Darth on Jun 13, 2020 20:04:53 GMT
Because it's been made extremely clear that ONLY people who have admin status on the forums (which itself is granted by EAO) may be added in any way, shape, or form. And telnets have always adhered to this rule, so I see no reason to change it beyond your personal philosophy that I (and many others) disagree with. Your logic is equivalent to setting up a command, making a rule that only certain people should ever use this command, but vehemently refusing to actually limit the permission. Why do we need an honor system for the sake of having an honor system other than "hey, 99% of the time telnets honor the rule"? Because the honor system works, and it has been working since its creation. And no, you've given another false equivalency - the rule isn't "only certain people should ever use this command", but that it should only be used for in a specific scenario. |
|
|
|
Post by Polaris Seltzeris on Jun 13, 2020 20:23:03 GMT
Your logic is equivalent to setting up a command, making a rule that only certain people should ever use this command, but vehemently refusing to actually limit the permission. Why do we need an honor system for the sake of having an honor system other than "hey, 99% of the time telnets honor the rule"? Because the honor system works, and it has been working since its creation. And no, you've given another false equivalency - the rule isn't "only certain people should ever use this command", but that it should only be used for in a specific scenario. What is this specific scenario? Because it shouldn't be the job of a telnet admin to add new people to the admin or master builder database, I simply fundamentally disagree with that and find it ridiculous... I have no problem with people being verified, my issue is with having a very pointless honor system given how simple it is to allow the EAO or ECD to add offline players. |
|
- March 7, 2016 - Adaptified
- October 31, 2016
- November 30, 2017
