XF 1.2 Locked Thread Permissions

[MistyMeanor]

How do I configure the permissions to where if I lock a thread, that I posted to not allow the Super Mod, or Mods to reply to it?

I want them to have the ability to open and close threads if needed for regular registered members, but I have ... how can I say this nicely... ditzy group of mods.

Example: I posted a thread that is a Master Invitee List that I want the mods to just edit it when they invite new people. I put specific instructions that some are failing to read (about to do moderator evaluations and may do some house cleaning) but anyway, then they friggen reply to it with the people they invited.

CAN I have the best of both worlds, can I make it where they still have their permissions to open/close threads but not reply to one's that are closed? Especially when it's a thread made by Admin!

 

[MistyMeanor]

Wow, is it just me... or do I not see ANY options to not allow certain usergroups to reply to closed threads. Is it just a default thing that if you are staff, you can reply to closed threads that anyone makes?? If so, I want to HIGHLY suggest either an add-on be made for that, or it is added to next upgrade of XF 1.2.

My only thoughts are from the time I have been with XF that there is too much that mods are allowed by default to do, overall. Seems the general consensus is that if they are your staff, they should have most privileges by default. But not everyone has a super great staff, mods come and go, especially when you are starting a brand new forum on your own, and have to pick mods ... don't have a set group of very trusted people to begin with, and as Admin, we should be able to control what the mods can or cannot do a little more. Not trying to talk bad or anything about XF, because I love XF, will never go back to vB... I am just making a suggestion and voicing my opinion is all.

 

[Mike]

If you allow them to lock and unlock threads, they can reply to a closed thread (because they could just unlock it, reply, and then lock it again).

 

[MistyMeanor]

If you allow them to lock and unlock threads, they can reply to a closed thread (because they could just unlock it, reply, and then lock it again).

I would like to suggest that there be usergroup permissions made to where an admin can allow their moderation team to open/close threads, however, can only do it for their own threads/posts, and the threads of registered members. But are NOT allowed to open/close a thread made by admin and/or super moderator... which therefor means they cannot reply to a thread closed by admin/super mod as well.

There should be more usergroup permissions allowable to the admin to trump some of the permissions of the mods. Not only with this particular issue, but for many more I have come across since moving to XF. The admin should have the ABILITY to have a little more power to allow or not allow mods to do certain things.

 

[Paul B]

In XenForo, administrators are not moderators and have zero moderating capabilities.

That is a very important distinction.

It sounds like you want different moderator levels and permissions.

 

[Amaury]

In XenForo, administrators are not moderators and have zero moderating capabilities.

That is a very important distinction.

It sounds like you want different moderator levels and permissions.

I'm pretty sure this is the case with any forum software, such as vBulletin and phpBB. However -- and I know we discussed this before -- this still confuses me.

 

[MistyMeanor]

In XenForo, administrators are not moderators and have zero moderating capabilities.

That is a very important distinction.

It sounds like you want different moderator levels and permissions.

Ok you have me totally lost now... Not all Admin's are just behind the scenes and some don't solely depend on the moderating team to move threads, close threads, edit posts, etc. etc. Some are very hands on... most I have come in contact with in the past 10 years of working with forums. That while they may be "admin" they still do a lot of moderating tasks daily.

If an administrator creates a thread that they close for the purpose of no further posts being made, they should be able to set the permissions to where threads closed by admin, cannot then be opened by moderator or replied to by anyone else. In vB Admin had full control over little situations like this. If I closed a thread in vB... my mods could not then turn around, trump my abilities and open it back up, reply to it, etc. They could only open/close their own threads, each others within the mod group, and could for registered members.

But, if the mods created an thread and closed it, admin COULD turn around and open it back up if they deemed necessary for whatever given scenario.

 

[Paul B]

Administrating and moderating are two entirely different functions.

The fact that most site owners happen to be administrators and moderators is irrelevant.

On my site I have administrators who can't moderate, moderators who can't access the ACP and some members who can do both.

 

[MistyMeanor]

Administrating and moderating are two entirely different functions.

The fact that most site owners happen to be administrators and moderators is irrelevant.

On my site I have administrators who can't moderate, moderators who can't access the ACP and some members who can do both.

Well I think this is not really relevant though, because this just is about who has what permissions and how you particularly run your forum.

It isn't about the proper definition of administrator versus moderator. Because I have personally never heard of this. I have myself, which should be the top-level hierarchy and be able to see all and do all within the realm of my forum which I own. If I choose to be admin AND moderate the forum, then that is what I choose to do right? I then have my co-administrator, which has access to ACP, to where if something happened while I was out and about that the moderator's couldn't handle, then she could go in and attempt to fix things, but she rarely accesses the ACP otherwise. Then I have a Super Moderator (which I consider the next in line to admin, works with admin on a lot of things, and has a bit more permissions than general mods -- but no access to ACP other than to approve new members). I then have moderators, my eyes and ears for the forum... for example, I have the forum set to where they cannot delete threads or posts. They can edit them, but in the end, for my forum, it's up to the discretion of the admin in the end if a thread is totally deleted. Otherwise, they have the ability to move threads to appropriate categories, or into the moderator's forum for discussion, they can edit, warn members, etc. etc.

So I am not really understanding the point trying to be made as it doesn't matter about definition. In the end, I have all the tools to moderate available to me if I chose to do so. I have the ability to grant and remove permissions from any and all usergroups. So all I am saying is that there should be a few more permissions to trump specific situations like this, where I have moderator's (mods that are really up to par as I would wish for, but it is what it is) that are not following my directions of amending a master list I created by editing it, and keep replying to the thread. So right now, my only options to fix this issue (where if I close a darn thread, it should be closed... period... to all replies from anyone) is to remove their abilities to open/close threads just so that they are not able to reply to informational threads I post.

This isn't that complicated. There just needs to be permissions for this, and other small things like: moderators can/cannot, open/close/reply to admin locked threads.

 

[Paul B]

You keep ignoring the relevant point (despite you claiming it is irrelevant) so I will repeat it once more:

moderators can/cannot, open/close/reply to admin locked threads.

Administrators cannot lock threads, only moderators can.

As I have already said, what you want is different moderator levels.

 

[MistyMeanor]

You keep ignoring the relevant point (despite you claiming it is irrelevant) so I will repeat it once more:

Administrators cannot lock threads, only moderators can.

As I have already said, what you want is different moderator levels.

As an administrator, that also moderates, and has locked a thread. I UNDERSTAND that I cannot do this within XF; obviously. But this concept of the separation of administrators not being distinctively separated from the term "moderator" blows my mind and this is the first I have ever heard of forcing the hand essentially of lumping if you moderate your own forum as an acting administrator, that you have to be categorized at the same level as your moderators and they can then have to right to overturn your moderation decisions.

But IMHO, I find this ridiculous. Coming from vB, there was a very distinct level of difference and every admin from every forum I have known over the many years was hands on, and also moderated their own forum as well. As admin, we had a lot more power and there wasn't this whole ... if you moderate (the act) then you basically sacrifice your title as admin because whatever you do can be trumped by your own team. The mods couldn't reply to closed threads made by admin, and there was a specific permission to set that, as well as other things.

Just like Conversation Essentials made by @Syndol my good friend... I knew I was on the cusp of maybe demoting one of my moderators. We have team PC chats, but I noticed as an admin, I couldn't "kick" moderators out of the PC at a later date. They would have to leave on their own, and/or we would have to start a new PC. I brought this up to him, and he agreed to add it to his next upgrade, but then said he didn't think admin should be able to kick admin, nor mods other mods etc. and I agreed with him, no way, that is just way too much power floating about. Well, thank God for the ability of him adding that because ended up having a falling out with that particular moderator, and I was then able to "kick" him from the PC.

 

[Jeremy]

Misty, as Paul said, what you are looking for just isn't how XenForo implements staffing. Yes, an administrator can moderate (with added permissions), but by default the only thing an Administrator can do is access the ACP. True, when you install the administrator is a super administrator (able to access Administrator Permissions), an administrator (with all permissions), and a moderator. Any administrator you promote after install, becomes just an administrator with whatever elevated permissions you provide. The software really makes no distinction between staff hierarchy.

As for the posting in locked threads, you could revoke thread closing permissions within the individual staff forums. That most likely will accomplish what you would like done.

 

[MistyMeanor]

Misty, as Paul said, what you are looking for just isn't how XenForo implements staffing. Yes, an administrator can moderate (with added permissions), but by default the only thing an Administrator can do is access the ACP. True, when you install the administrator is a super administrator (able to access Administrator Permissions), an administrator (with all permissions), and a moderator. Any administrator you promote after install, becomes just an administrator with whatever elevated permissions you provide. The software really makes no distinction between staff hierarchy.

As for the posting in locked threads, you could revoke thread closing permissions within the individual staff forums. That most likely will accomplish what you would like done.

Thank you @King Kovifor ... I will try that. That's all I was looking for is maybe some other options I could use to do this, and that is really the only flaw I can see with XF is the way they do NOT make a distinction between staff hierarchy. Also, wanted this to be discussed and something to think about a little bit more regarding potential future add ons that are either 3rd party, or implemented in future XF releases, to do just that, give admins a little more permissions over the moderators and make a clearer distinction like vB does.