Forum Permissions - I just cant comprehend!!!

[azw]

Is there any different between these two settings?

• Groups' Permissions > User Permissions = No access
• Forum Permissions > A specific forum > A specific group (like Guests) = No role assigned

Or is the effect the same: they can't even see the forum?

Thanks for this helpful thread!

[Acyd Burn]

Yes, there is a huge difference.

Groups' Permissions > User Permissions = No access

This would set the role "No access" for the groups' user permissions (by user permissions user-specific permissions are meant). Later on, you only need to adjust the role and the groups having this role will use the changed permissions.

Forum Permissions > A specific forum > A specific group (like Guests) = No role assigned

This is for assigning forum-related permissions for a specific forum to a specific group. Forum permissions are different to user permissions (above) of course. The "no role assigned" option is for the admin to specify individual permissions not tied to a role - here the individual permissions are accessible if you click the "Advanced" link. Therefore, "no role assigned" does not mean the group is having no access; it only means that either there are no permissions set or custom permissions applied. Here i have to admit i intend to add an indicator for the first case to let the admin know which case is true (no permissions assigned/all set to NO or individual permissions assigned).

[azw]

I really appreciate your responding, Acyd Burn. (And since I'm talking wih one of our main leaders, let me say that I'm impressed with Olympus. It's running smoothly and has great features, especially for moderators.)

One thing I haven't found is a way to create a "no access" permission role in which I can deny access totally. I'd like to be albe to create a role that says the user can't read the forum or see the table of contents.

Otherwise, I think your message explains what I was asking for, but I'm going to have to sit think about what you wrote. The labels are hard to grasp.

It would help me understand if we could change the terminology so that there is a clearly different way of talking about the different kinds of users and different kinds of permissions. It seems like we have a matrix of permissions of 2 or 3 dimensions. It's mind-boggling. This short phrase illustrates the difficulty perfectly:

groups' user permissions (by user permissions user-specific permissions are meant)....

I'd be willing to think about this if you'd like some help.

[the_shark]

I follow you guys very well in this. Let’s keep on the same idea with the two phone packages (2 groups ex:User and Admin). Were are the permissions saved?

Since I am running phpbb and webCalendar it would be nice if I can set the Admin rights and user rights in one location instead of 4 locations.

[mrgtb]

Hia guys,

Im just trying to grasp the new persmission system, but cannot grasp how the two 'kinds' of persmissions mesh together.

I wonder if someone could give me an example of how they set theirs?

The issue im having really is that i feel like im going around in circles.

In group permissions i add user and mod permissions, then i need to add them in forum permissions too?


Stu

I agree, I think the new phpBb3 version is really good and can't wait for gold. But the permissions are really confusing to understand, seriously they were so easy to use in phpBB2. And now they most be the most confusing set of permissions to understand than any other forum board software out there - and I've used most!

[matthewf]

Personally I like the permission system, complex yes, but very good overall, maybe in places it could have been better, but in general, its a lot, lot better then phpbb2 ever was, and the permissions are damn useful for dealing with spammers, sure they could create another account, but with the roles feature, if you have defined the forum and user permissions before hand to both have a spammer role, limiting what they can do, just a small bit of editing, and the user can't do much, so yeah, I like the permission system

as for admin not seeing every forum by default, there could be reasons for that, remember there are the permission admin then forum admin roles, you as a full admin, might not want either to see a forum for whatever reason, so there could be mny reasons why you don't want a admin to see certain forums, admin aren't all powerful like they were in phpbb2, you have the power to limit them, especially if you are the board founder, they can't touch you but you can touch them for whatever reason

[jumborex]

[...] Here i have to admit i intend to add an indicator for the first case to let the admin know which case is true (no permissions assigned/all set to NO or individual permissions assigned).

I would suggest to Acyd, and all people which are inside the development, to make really something for the Admins that simply cannot see by a glance the permission situation in the single Forums. This was true also with all previous versions. Imagine a possible synopsis, in the style:

Code: Select all

                                                  Read   Write
Group Developer                                     Y      Y
Group Users                                         -      -
User Happy                                          Y      N

The previous exemplum means that ALL permission applied to a Forum are reported, both derived from global, or local permissions. With this kind of help, possibly it will be easier to understand the persmissions applied and the interpolation...
Presently I was in a situation where the single elements were green in the forum, but a global negation could not admit the access to many people. The idea is to avoid errors of this kind.

[naderman]

Have you looked at View Permissions? That does exactly that and if you click the icon next to a permission ("trace permission") you even get information about why it's set that way.