Anope IRC Services

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: 1.9.7 ChanServ Successor  (Read 3425 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

cirinho

  • Anope User
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 18
  • vIRCio.org
    • vIRCio.org
1.9.7 ChanServ Successor
« on: December 12, 2012, 07:32:29 AM »

The successor is just as garnish, and as a single function to be the founder when the channel drop. If not add the successor in access he has no access whatsoever.

The successor should have automatically all access / commands founder ... except change the founder (Sep founder)
Logged

katsklaw

  • Supporter
  • Anope User
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 537
Re: 1.9.7 ChanServ Successor
« Reply #1 on: December 12, 2012, 02:48:41 PM »

Automaticically granting founder access to the the successor would assume that all founders on all channls on all networks want their successors to have full access, which I assure you would be an incorrect assumption. The founder should be fee to choose what level acess the successor gets.

The purpose of the successor is simply to tell Anope whom inherits the channel in the event of the founders nick becoming unregistered, nothing more. Successor is _not_ the same as "co-founder" although many channels use it as such.
Logged

cirinho

  • Anope User
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 18
  • vIRCio.org
    • vIRCio.org
Re: 1.9.7 ChanServ Successor
« Reply #2 on: December 12, 2012, 07:34:52 PM »

I think the founder, considering that is chosen by the founder, should have all privileges automatically unless change the founder. But respect opposing view and understand what you meant, though not min to make logical sense.
Logged

katsklaw

  • Supporter
  • Anope User
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 537
Re: 1.9.7 ChanServ Successor
« Reply #3 on: December 13, 2012, 12:06:17 AM »

I think the founder, considering that is chosen by the founder, should have all privileges automatically unless change the founder.

The problem is not everyone shares that point of view. I for one would have a huge problem if I were a user on your network and you didn't allow me to run my channel as I see fit. We can't just take the views of one or a few into consideration but the wishes of as many as possible and that simply wouldn't happen if the network administration started dictating what access the successor or any other user in any channel that is not their own gets. To be blunt, it may be your network, but it's not your channel. The channel founder chooses the successor so it's the channel founders prerogative to what access, if any, the successor is to have. Automatically assigning any level of access other than "none" would be doing just that and reducing the usefulness of successor by reducing the number of possible access combinations.

For example: How do you think a channel founder would feel if they was using their Eggdrop bot as the successor so that if their nick expired they still had access to regain founder status and your software granted full, unrestricted access to a bot while it's the successor? Especially when the documentation as well as 20 year old standard practice states to never give any bot more access than it needs just in case it gets hacked.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up