[Blend]

D, on 19 May 2017 - 04:18 PM, said:

On another note, I found today a panel where I can activate/deactivate the rep system on a per-user-group basis.

IIRC there was a couple instances long ago where someone repping an alt (with comment) lead to some controversy/problems. I could remove the possibility of this happening again by disabling reputation for all mafia alts, if you wanted.

I definitely think that this should be done - mafia alts don't need repping abilities, so no need to leave them on!

[D'rek]

House, on 19 May 2017 - 04:25 PM, said:

D, on 19 May 2017 - 04:11 PM, said:

IIRC there is a way to make totally invisible threads. Barring that, you can also make an entire sub-forum invisible except to those who have access to it (already being used for a quite a few secret sub-forums on this site, actually).

However, the biggest reason we've always avoided using anything like that before is that players who are also moderators/admins on this site will already have their permissions setup to bypass all that - they'll see the invisible threads/subforums by default.

It's also a pain in the butt to switch the permissions around in the admin panel, require waiting for a mafia-knowledgeable mod/admin to get online to process the request, and/or sometimes if a mistake is made changing the permissions lead to a game having to be restarted/cancelled (e.g. if an alt that was a killer in the last game doesn't get its permissions changed correctly or the alt PM is sent out too soon, and the player using that alt in this game who shouldn't have access to the thread sees it right at the start before things can be fixed).

Easy workaround...

Only give access to that forum to Pathshaper & authorized alts that are only used for games (with non-player site mods having access to Path-Shaper at all times for regulatory purposes).

Not sure if that is possible. Admin accounts don't have a list of subforums they can access... they simply have access to ALL subforums.

[House]

D, on 19 May 2017 - 04:37 PM, said:

House, on 19 May 2017 - 04:25 PM, said:

D, on 19 May 2017 - 04:11 PM, said:

IIRC there is a way to make totally invisible threads. Barring that, you can also make an entire sub-forum invisible except to those who have access to it (already being used for a quite a few secret sub-forums on this site, actually).

However, the biggest reason we've always avoided using anything like that before is that players who are also moderators/admins on this site will already have their permissions setup to bypass all that - they'll see the invisible threads/subforums by default.

It's also a pain in the butt to switch the permissions around in the admin panel, require waiting for a mafia-knowledgeable mod/admin to get online to process the request, and/or sometimes if a mistake is made changing the permissions lead to a game having to be restarted/cancelled (e.g. if an alt that was a killer in the last game doesn't get its permissions changed correctly or the alt PM is sent out too soon, and the player using that alt in this game who shouldn't have access to the thread sees it right at the start before things can be fixed).

Easy workaround...

Only give access to that forum to Pathshaper & authorized alts that are only used for games (with non-player site mods having access to Path-Shaper at all times for regulatory purposes).

Not sure if that is possible. Admin accounts don't have a list of subforums they can access... they simply have access to ALL subforums.

Likewise, they'd simply have access to all private threads, I'm sure.

You know... Like the spoiler thread.

This post has been edited by House: 19 May 2017 - 04:41 PM

[D'rek]

House, on 19 May 2017 - 04:40 PM, said:

D, on 19 May 2017 - 04:37 PM, said:

House, on 19 May 2017 - 04:25 PM, said:

D, on 19 May 2017 - 04:11 PM, said:

IIRC there is a way to make totally invisible threads. Barring that, you can also make an entire sub-forum invisible except to those who have access to it (already being used for a quite a few secret sub-forums on this site, actually).

However, the biggest reason we've always avoided using anything like that before is that players who are also moderators/admins on this site will already have their permissions setup to bypass all that - they'll see the invisible threads/subforums by default.

It's also a pain in the butt to switch the permissions around in the admin panel, require waiting for a mafia-knowledgeable mod/admin to get online to process the request, and/or sometimes if a mistake is made changing the permissions lead to a game having to be restarted/cancelled (e.g. if an alt that was a killer in the last game doesn't get its permissions changed correctly or the alt PM is sent out too soon, and the player using that alt in this game who shouldn't have access to the thread sees it right at the start before things can be fixed).

Easy workaround...

Only give access to that forum to Pathshaper & authorized alts that are only used for games (with non-player site mods having access to Path-Shaper at all times for regulatory purposes).

Not sure if that is possible. Admin accounts don't have a list of subforums they can access... they simply have access to ALL subforums.

Likewise, they'd simply have access to all private threads, I'm sure.

You know... Like the spoiler thread.

Indeed we do, which is why the spoiler threads are put in the separate subforum Spoiler Heaven where less info is automatically visible and you can't accidentally go in there with one mis-click. Even with that, we (and any of the game alts, for that matter), can see that the last post in the Spoiler Heaven subforum was by [login name].

It's fine for the players to see that the latest post in Spoiler Heaven is by Path-Shaper, the game moderator's login, or a dead game alt, as that doesn't spoil anything about the game. But if you made a "scum chat" thread in Spoiler Heaven (or any other restricted subforum) everyone would be able to see that, e.g., the latest post in that subforum was made by Fener, and since Fener is a still-living alt in the game it would reveal Fener as scum (probably). You don't need to actually go into the subforum or thread to have this info revealed.

Make that subforum or thread invisible, and the game alts can't see this info anymore, but the mods/admins can still see it, again even without going into the subforum or thread themselves.

[Messremb]

Basically, stuff works fine the way it is.

[House]

Eh, an alternative could be to do what they used to do on MS before they created Private Threads there.

Mafia used to use QuickTopic for their out of game communication. Then the link to the QT was provided post-game.

That completely bypasses the whole permissions issue.

Sample thread: https://www.quicktop...H/q6HcdgNm8i3jS

Notice the URL format. Not likely to simply be guessed.

Path-Shaper could make the QT, and the Mafia can post there without even making accounts.

This post has been edited by House: 19 May 2017 - 08:24 PM

[D'rek]

Yup. If whomever is running a game doesn't want to labouriously copy+paste all the PMs to the spoiler thread one by one, they can definitely choose to use some external site where it is easier to copy the off-thread chat into the spoiler thread at the end.

Doesn't need to be any sort of forum-wide policy, each game mod can use whatever system works best for them! (For that matter, not every game explicity has to have all its off-thread messages copied to the spoiler thread... but it is nice to do so.)



On the game alts rep note, we probably won't get a ton of discussion on it in this thread, but I'll go ahead and try disabling it. Can easily be re-enabled if anyone during the next game notices it and has a good reason to add it back.

For that matter, if someone devises some later game where they want to purposefully use rep somehow, it'd be easy enough to add back at that time, too.

[Tattersail_]

D'rek would love to play one of your games and would live to play a game with you.

[HoosierDaddy]

Vengeance, on 17 May 2017 - 06:06 PM, said:

JPK you have been admitted to High House Mafia. Congratulations.


The obligatory hazing will begin sharply at 1:37am local time. We expect you to drink no less then 4 bottles of whiskey in a 12 hour period (left over from when Morgoth ran the house) while playing 2 simultaneous games of mafia while controlling 4 different alts.




While I am in a caring and generious mood is there anyone else who needs access to the sanctum sanctorum of Mafia.

Me you dick. Detective via your Clousseau game.

[HoosierDaddy]

System works well as is. Originally members could see posts to SH via Find New Posts. I alerted Silencer who was just an admin at the time to that thing. Fixed.

The Scum chat is unnecessary. Simply keep it regularly logged and noted in SH. It posits too many problems otherwise.

Ta.

[D'rek]

HoosierDaddy, on 20 May 2017 - 04:49 PM, said:

Vengeance, on 17 May 2017 - 06:06 PM, said:

JPK you have been admitted to High House Mafia. Congratulations.


The obligatory hazing will begin sharply at 1:37am local time. We expect you to drink no less then 4 bottles of whiskey in a 12 hour period (left over from when Morgoth ran the house) while playing 2 simultaneous games of mafia while controlling 4 different alts.




While I am in a caring and generious mood is there anyone else who needs access to the sanctum sanctorum of Mafia.

Me you dick. Detective via your Clousseau game.

Really? I checked the admin panel and you are in HHM, so you should already have access.

[HoosierDaddy]

D, on 20 May 2017 - 06:09 PM, said:

HoosierDaddy, on 20 May 2017 - 04:49 PM, said:

Vengeance, on 17 May 2017 - 06:06 PM, said:

JPK you have been admitted to High House Mafia. Congratulations.


The obligatory hazing will begin sharply at 1:37am local time. We expect you to drink no less then 4 bottles of whiskey in a 12 hour period (left over from when Morgoth ran the house) while playing 2 simultaneous games of mafia while controlling 4 different alts.




While I am in a caring and generious mood is there anyone else who needs access to the sanctum sanctorum of Mafia.

Me you dick. Detective via your Clousseau game.

Really? I checked the admin panel and you are in HHM, so you should already have access.

But, I don't?

That's weird.

[HoosierDaddy]

Just double checked. That's a negative Ghost Rider.

Huh.

[Lady Bliss]

HoosierDaddy, on 20 May 2017 - 06:14 PM, said:

D, on 20 May 2017 - 06:09 PM, said:

HoosierDaddy, on 20 May 2017 - 04:49 PM, said:

Vengeance, on 17 May 2017 - 06:06 PM, said:

JPK you have been admitted to High House Mafia. Congratulations.


The obligatory hazing will begin sharply at 1:37am local time. We expect you to drink no less then 4 bottles of whiskey in a 12 hour period (left over from when Morgoth ran the house) while playing 2 simultaneous games of mafia while controlling 4 different alts.




While I am in a caring and generious mood is there anyone else who needs access to the sanctum sanctorum of Mafia.

Me you dick. Detective via your Clousseau game.

Really? I checked the admin panel and you are in HHM, so you should already have access.

But, I don't?

That's weird.

I wonder if our other groups are overriding our HIM access, because I don't see anything new either...

[HoosierDaddy]

I don't have other groups? I'm not an Abyss member.....

[Lady Bliss]

HoosierDaddy, on 20 May 2017 - 11:08 PM, said:

I don't have other groups? I'm not an Abyss member.....

Kings of drink isn't a group?

[HoosierDaddy]

No, it is a stupid, errr, group.

Good point. I meant I don't have acceptance to any other Malaz group.

[D'rek]

It's more complex than it initially looked. There's both groups and permission sets. HHM has its own permission set, which gives members access to MAA, but since you two's primary groups are KoD/AbyssArmy your permission set is Regular, which doesn't have access. Not sure how to overwrite it, short of making individual per-user permission sets.

I'll make a PM thread with Silencer to see if we can find a way to do it.

[House]

D, on 21 May 2017 - 03:44 AM, said:

It's more complex than it initially looked. There's both groups and permission sets. HHM has its own permission set, which gives members access to MAA, but since you two's primary groups are KoD/AbyssArmy your permission set is Regular, which doesn't have access. Not sure how to overwrite it, short of making individual per-user permission sets.

I'll make a PM thread with Silencer to see if we can find a way to do it.

That's odd, because permission sets are basically toggles, with everything defaulted to 0 (no access) that each respective set allows the admin to toggle that setting to 1 (read access), 2 (read/write access - well, write access is another 1, but you get the point), etc. additively.


There shouldn't be a clash because when you add 1 to 0, you have 1, and so on.

I worked as a senior technical support agent for IPS. IP.Board is excellent software.

This post has been edited by House: 21 May 2017 - 10:27 AM

[D'rek]

House, on 21 May 2017 - 09:53 AM, said:

D, on 21 May 2017 - 03:44 AM, said:

It's more complex than it initially looked. There's both groups and permission sets. HHM has its own permission set, which gives members access to MAA, but since you two's primary groups are KoD/AbyssArmy your permission set is Regular, which doesn't have access. Not sure how to overwrite it, short of making individual per-user permission sets.

I'll make a PM thread with Silencer to see if we can find a way to do it.

That's odd, because permission sets are basically toggles, with everything defaulted to 0 (no access) that each respective set allows the admin to toggle that setting to 1 (read access), 2 (read/write access - well, write access is another 1, but you get the point), etc. additively.


There shouldn't be a clash because when you add 1 to 0, you have 1, and so on.

I worked as a senior technical support agent for IPS. IP.Board is excellent software.

Correct, but each user only has one permission set applied (based on their primary user group) so that interaction doesn't end up happening (adding or removing a user's secondary user group memberships does not seem to have any affect on their applied permission set).

I found an overwrite to force multiple permission sets to be applied to a user, though, which should presumably act the way that you describe.