No need to delete what you already put... you obviously wanted to say it
I didn't delete anything, if anything I reworded a post to sound less aggressive than I actually feel on this issue or it got deleted or edited by a mod or something I dunno and don't care. I said what I had to ... you are trying to argue with me instead of talking out the merits of the situation in a fair and realistic proposition that suits many.
I am saying this....with license holder representing anyone who can login to the customer section
If
1 or 0 = (Is license holder) or (Isn't license holder)
this is obvious...is the user a license holder return 1, if not return 0
but by combining this...
if
1 or 0 = (Is because associated with (unknown)) or (Is not because associated with any)
if this returns a 1 the person is only licensed because associated...you have the option to deny them here.
if this returns a 0 and if (Is license holder) returned a 1 the person is the actual person responsible for the license.
....then it would come to the point where you would need an option here at xf where a user needs can box saying I will not allow associated users api permissions...
which would allow a 1 or 0 to be returned for licenseHolder allows api access to associated or licenseHolder does not allow access
So if a user tried to switch it you would have the option with a single bit to automatically deny it and also allow people who don't share abilities but have associated users to still pursue purchasing your products.
You would also need the ability to opt out of the api all together for those who dont care enough to be bothered and want to completely avoid that system. That is where I fit in. If it means I can't buy anyone's addon, so be it...in my opinion it is better than feeling policed when I setup an account in the first place. Which is what I am going to do if I so choose to buy an addon...I am going to buy a new license of xenforo with a new account and buy an addon...I will then use it on the domain I choose.
You would not have a conversation with me and let it get the point where that suggestion would be made and possible follow up points that a 2 way conversation with the general population would have led to.
It's not as simple as do it and forget about what 'regular people feel'. And when there is people who can't grasp how a system like this works and you ignore and disregard them and only push forward with your needs they feel outcast and compelled to push away when you say privacy is nothing and none is being lost. If these are all your friends you effectively represent them to an outside to your group of friends when you speak in such manner. Since your needs challenge my needs my only logical response is to defend my position. You don't want to come to a resolution, you want to dictate. It really seems that simple to me.
I agree we disagree. But I do contest the equality in terms of conversation quality for those on the side of privacy mostly because private type people don't really group up with each other to do business with each other as private entities from each other so they are not going to be collaborating amongst themselves on ideas of how the system would suit them.
What I am getting at is private type people don't have the voice that you are trying to represent and you invalidating everyone who disagrees with you creates a skewed view of reality when it comes to the overall view of the people this system would effect when you respond to every post in this thread. If you are going to try and be the mediating voice you need to be a show a little more concern for the views of the people on any side of this situation.
Either way if a solution has to be built for this it is not going to be simple and still respect all...
