Passed Unhook All Privileges for Leaders

[DeletedUser]

Proposal

To unhook all permissions(except Founder) and let you choose at will what each leader should get.

Reason

Many alliances have leaders whom are close advisors, but each of these advisors has a specialized function. Often times having each advisor do what you want is based purely on trust and cannot be altered in Permissions. If permissions were unhooked, this task would become a lot easier.

Details

Very simple. Instead of giving Leaders: Recruiter, Diplomat, Mass Mail, Forum Moderator, and Internal Forum access, unhook it. So you could have a leader who is not a forum mod, or one who isn't a recruiter. All leaders have the power to access hidden forums.

Visual Aids

This is just to give you a sense of what it will be like. Actually, there will be more rights than this which will be shown, but they will be in the existing side-by-side format. There will be rights like Forum Admin, Kick Out users, edit profile, edit internal announcements, treasurer (if the Alliance Warehouse idea goes through), General (merely titular at the moment), etc.

Balance/Abuse Prevention

Concerns have been raised about leaders giving themselves all the rights. Leaders can only give other Leaders the rights which they already have.

Summary

This is just a small administrative change which will allow alliances to give leaders more specialized functions.

 

[DeletedUser]

I would like the fact that forum mods could actually be forum admins now

 

[DeletedUser]

In some ways, I agree. A way back I was hoping I could get a leader and remove his permission of recruitment however I couldn't... . ALTHOUGH there is abuse:
If a leader didn't have permission to view hidden subforums, it wouldn't mix as leaders have the power to administrate the forums.

 

[DeletedUser]

If a leader didn't have permission to view hidden subforums, it wouldn't mix as leaders have the power to administrate the forums.

in the idea about forum mods. There would be two options, moderator to hidden forums and moderator to normal forums. The moderator to hidden forums would require the access to hidden forums to be activated.

 

[DeletedUser]

How would this work out?
There would have to be the same for leader option too...

 

[DeletedUser]

Well I think If being a leader automatically lets you view hidden forums then that is fine.

E.g.
Leader privs automatically gives hidden forum privs.

Forum mod gives access to mod normal forums.

Hidden forum mod needs hidden forum privs before activating.

 

[DeletedUser]

But that's changing the entire idea

 

[DeletedUser]

Okay, leaders now have the power to view internal forums by default.

 

[DeletedUser]

I have one thing to say on this issue.

Meh.

 

[DeletedUser2795]

seems okay, but the leader position itself entails many things (kicking members, changing rights, forum admin) that would allow them to promote themselves, cancel out the lack of other powers, etc. So you could have forum admins who could not moderate? kickers who can not recruit? People who can give themselves all the rights???

 

[DeletedUser]

IMO this idea would just confuse things and maybe even cause a power struggle. I've never had/seen a need for something like this.

 

[DeletedUser]

Well its just that forum mods can't administrate fourms, which is generally what they expect to be able to do :/

 

[DeletedUser]

IMO this idea would just confuse things and maybe even cause a power struggle. I've never had/seen a need for something like this.

Exactly, and also, if you want a leader to not have forum mod, then just unhook the leader and take off forum mod aswell

 

[DeletedUser]

Mmm I'm not sure good idea but not super necessary.

 

[DeletedUser10081]

I think its a great idea

 

[DeletedUser]

Thanks themightyone2.

 

[DeletedUser10081]

Thanks themightyone2.

you can just call me mighty

 

[DeletedUser1405]

Surely a leader needs all the powers he gets to make sure he can run the alliance smoothly, i know if i started to lose my privs as leader i would start to suspect something.
I would agree that 2ic should have choosable privs or commanders but leaders are what they say on the packet.
The whole priv package.

 

[DeletedUser]

Not sure about this one, leaders will not like to be demoted in such a way, levels of trust is needed, I've never seen a problem where this would be needed unless from inactivity.

If that is the case most good leaders will offer to step down.

Next thing is a leader has followers, just because you decide one person should become a leader and run one aspect like Diplomacy doesn't mean that he is the decision maker. He/She may always run to get advise of anther member that really has the power to decide.

I guess each alliance can do it's own thing and the idea isn't bad but, this sounds more like a leadership issue then anything.

 

[DeletedUser10081]

but if your a leader you would want all the rights except for founder fights