[RFC] New Forum permission for viewing other users' topics

[Jacob]

If the logic is like this:

Yes -> It works exactly like the system is now. The Yes will be used as the default for the current roles.
No OR never -> The user can only see the topics in which he is the author

Then: Can view other users' topics, or Can view topics started by others.

[brunoais]

Due to the spirit of the permissions system, I think the name should not be something that limits but something that allows.
In other words, when the option is set to yes, it should allow the user to see, do, etc... more than if set to no.
More comments?

Unfortunately, the point of this permission is to limit what topics the user can see. So it may be hard to figure out a way to say it in a way that doesn't sound like it's limiting. Also, because it's the admin that sees the permissions, rather than the user, I don't think it would be an issue if the text is "limiting"

Here's what I'd go with: "Can only view own topics".

True, the spirit of this permission is to limit something. But there's also our "friend":

"All YES · All NO · All NEVER"
The logic is:
All YES -> no limitations
All NO -> Limit as much as you can
All NEVER -> +-Same as NO

Did that make sense?

[imkingdavid]

Okay, that makes sense.

So like Jacob said, the permission would be something like:
"Can view posts by other members"
Yes: Default - No changes
No: User can only view his own posts in the forum.
Never: Same as No, overwrites any Yes setting from other groups.

[brunoais]

hum...
isn't better: "Can view topics started by other members"?
Well... It's a bigger sentence but I believe this one is still small and specific enough allowing forum admins not to ask themselves what that permission is for.

[brunoais]

I am RFC in this part of this new feature:
Does it make sense that for a moderator to know about a topic that is locked/unlocked in a forum that he moderates if he does not have the capability to see the topic?

Data:
He is moderating a forum where he can only see the topics that he has started.
He goes to see the logs.

Should the logs show that that topic (that he didn't start) was locked/unlocked? Should it just be omitted?
When I ask about moderators, I also ask about members of the members of the administration group.

Note: This is actually one of the twisted situations but we also need to think about all the twisted situations we can find to make a quality software.
(relevant phpBB code at (around) includes/functions_admin.php:270)

[AliasM2K]

What about this name "Read Only" ? And I think this permission may be implemented to blocked or banned users

[brunoais]

What about this name "Read Only" ?

What's the rationale behind choosing the name "Read Only"?

And I think this permission may be implemented to blocked or banned users

This is a forum based permission. You apply it to anyone you want, for each of the forums. You have a very high freedom of choice.

[naderman]

hum...
isn't better: "Can view topics started by other members"?
Well... It's a bigger sentence but I believe this one is still small and specific enough allowing forum admins not to ask themselves what that permission is for.

Yup that's better.

I am RFC in this part of this new feature:
Does it make sense that for a moderator to know about a topic that is locked/unlocked in a forum that he moderates if he does not have the capability to see the topic?

I think that is ok. Most of the time moderators would be allowed to view the topics anyway I imagine. It would certainly be better if it was hidden. But I think performance is important here. So if it would become a lot slower if you want to hide the topics, then that's not good either.

[brunoais]

I am RFC in this part of this new feature:
Does it make sense that for a moderator to know about a topic that is locked/unlocked in a forum that he moderates if he does not have the capability to see the topic?

I think that is ok. Most of the time moderators would be allowed to view the topics anyway I imagine. It would certainly be better if it was hidden. But I think performance is important here. So if it would become a lot slower if you want to hide the topics, then that's not good either.

Actually I'm throwing this out because the previous code was allowing the user without reading rights of the topic to see what was made in the topic and, at the same time, not having the link to the topic. I.e. No rights to read the topic where it happens -> no link to the topic & can see what was made in the topic.

[AliasM2K]

What's the rationale behind choosing the name "Read Only"?

Well, the users can read other members post.

This is a forum based permission. You apply it to anyone you want, for each of the forums. You have a very high freedom of choice.

Hmm... ok. I think I didn't quite get the discussion. My bad