Co-Admins permissions + General Admin Overview

    Hi!


    When I started here we had Co-Admins and Admins. Later Transportation Admin came and now we have Finance and Education Admins. Due to this fact it would be great to see a table which lists up all the permissions all of the admin roles have (Kind of like the one Facebook Fanpage has (Example picture here). Would be great to have on the Forums or somewhere.


    Also, and I might be wrong here, but I kind of see the "Hierarchy" of the admins like "Admin » Co-Admin » Transportation-, Finance- and Education Admin". Because of this it would be a logical change, I think, to implement all the rights of the Transportation-, Finance- and Education admins into the Co-Admins. This would leave the Alliance Co-Admins able to do everything they already can do + everything the lower level admins can do. This instead of them needing to have all admin roles to be able to fix these aspects.


    I also believe that the Co-Admins should be able to "Kick" members from the alliance. This might not work for all alliances, but I feel this would be a welcome change.


    ALTERNATIVELY
    It would be cool if the Admins would be able to edit which permissions the Co-Admin has (like have all the permissions and a checkbox beside it so we can check the permissions we want them to have).


    All inputs welcome :-)

    An overhaul of the permissions is something we'd like to see done at some point, especially since the moderation team is all admins or co-admins of some large alliances. However, we also have to look at it from a cost/benefit perspective. Asking Sebastian to spend time developing this means he's not developing something else - which is a trade-off with every new update. But a permissions overhaul only benefits a handful of players, where, say, a K-9 update is something that is beneficial to everyone.


    We'll look into making a permissions table, but that's something that you're welcome to do yourself :)

    Thank you for your reply. Yeah, I definitely see your point on the cost/benefit perspective, didn't think of it like that. So thanks for the insight! When it comes to a permissions table I would have no problem in doing that, however I really don't know all the features included in the specific roles. I just found out that Co-Admins can't kick members from my alliance, where I've gone for a long time thinking they had that ability :P

    Quote from TACRfan

    however I do think there should be an option to transfer ownership

    Yeah, I agree with that.


    Also, basically I think that having an option to choose (checkboxes) what the Co-Admin can do would be a great solution. Easy and adaptable to however a certain alliance wishes to set-up their admins. Maybe some alliances don't want the Co-Admins to be able to kick and have controll over Alliance Funds. While an other alliance would like to have their Co-Admins be able to kick members while not being able to do something else that the Co-Admin normally can. Basically, the system would be more adaptable.


    Though, this might be a more advanced system to implement, like Gavin said earlier.


    IMO, it would be perfect if the Co-Admins could do everything that the Admin can, except for Banning and promoting / demoting other Admins / Co-Admins.

    I am a Co-Admin for a small alliance, New Jersey Emergency Services. And not once have I had any power to promote, demote, ban, kick another Admin/Owner out, or anything of the sort. Nor would I ever want to unless instructed to do so by my leader. I'm just the second in charge and recruitment officer of the alliance. Idk how Co-Admins can do any of that. This is a good idea and should be Implemented in the near future for better control and organization for all alliances.


    We are an alliance of 5 which is preferable to me. It's not too complicated to oversee and manage, simple to keep tabs on members, and there's always a close and direct communication with members and staff.


    I was with about two or three large alliances as a member and I can tell you there was absolutely no communication with members and Admins unless they were close and barely any communication among members. Like one Admin would do one thing and another Admin would do something else. I barely spoke with any of the Admins. I feel that larger alliances need to utilize this idea as well as smaller ones. But larger ones need this so that there isn't any controversy among Admins and it's members.

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!

Register Yourself Login