Spring RTS Engine

I'm curious, what is the reasoning behind giving by default lobby moderators admin access to all spads autohosts?

The hosts are owned by the people that run them, the spring server is merely a relay and its moderation team has nothing to do with controlling autohost settings.

perhaps autohost admins decided it's a good idea and doesn't need changing?

imbaczek wrote:perhaps autohost admins decided it's a good idea and doesn't need changing?

Only they did not. As far as I know this was a decision made by bibim only. Most autohost runners on spring are too stupid to change it, or don't even know about it.

i can assure you i did.

bibim is the author of the software and the default configuration lies in his hands only. other owners of autohosts can easily change that setting. basically, it's a non-issue.

imbaczek wrote:i can assure you i did.

bibim is the author of the software and the default configuration lies in his hands only. other owners of autohosts can easily change that setting. basically, it's a non-issue.

It is an issue because moderators gain access to all spads autohosts by default. It is not even written anywhere that by using this software you give access to xyz people that happen to be moderators.

Regret wrote: Only they did not. As far as I know this was a decision made by bibim only. Most autohost runners on spring are too stupid to change it, or don't even know about it.

This is complete bull.
Anyone who sets up an autohost, and add himself as admin, will notice the little line there that grants lobby mods rights.

Also, if the situation arises that people on an autohost need help, and none of the registered autohost mods are around, its the smart choice to let lobby mods step in.

Beherith wrote:This is complete bull.
Anyone who sets up an autohost, and add himself as admin, will notice the little line there that grants lobby mods rights.

Also, if the situation arises that people on an autohost need help, and none of the registered autohost mods are around, its the smart choice to let lobby mods step in.

No not everyone will notice that. It would be smart if the autohost user was notified that there is someone else than him having access to his host.

Regret wrote:I'm curious, what is the reasoning behind giving by default lobby moderators admin access to all spads autohosts?

The hosts are owned by the people that run them, the spring server is merely a relay and its moderation team has nothing to do with controlling autohost settings.

The "Lobby moderator" access given by default to all lobby moderator is just there to allow these moderators to easily close the autohost battle if the autohost is using a wrong Spring version, or even shutdown the autohost if the bot is bugged and spamming a channel for instance. Else, the lobby moderators would have to ban the autohost account.

bibim wrote:The "Lobby moderator" access given by default to all lobby moderator is just there to allow these moderators to easily close the autohost battle if the autohost is using a wrong Spring version, or even shutdown the autohost if the bot is bugged and spamming a channel for instance. Else, the lobby moderators would have to ban the autohost account.

Then limit their rights to only these things so they can't mess with the settings/kick/spec people?

i dont think lobby mods would go into a autohost and abuse there privaliges. If they do there status as lobby mod would need review, lobby mods have access because of the reasons given above.

this is probably regret raging because he got kicked out of a bot for trolling or griefing of some sort, so i wouldnt give it any particular attention.

Otherside wrote:i dont think lobby mods would go into a autohost and abuse there privaliges. If they do there status as lobby mod would need review, lobby mods have access because of the reasons given above.

The reasons are logical for what bibim said. It makes no sense for them to be able to kick players/stop games/change server settings otherwise.

Otherside wrote:this is probably regret raging because he got kicked out of a bot for trolling or griefing of some sort, so i wouldnt give it any particular attention.

The poster of an idea/complaint has nothing to do with the legitimacy of the idea/complaint. Maybe you should put your personal insecurities aside and not derail topics needlessly?

Honestly I agree with Regret here there's no reason to give them more permissions than what they need.

YokoZar wrote:Honestly I agree with Regret here there's no reason to give them more permissions than what they need.

I can't complain that my autohosts are trolled by moderators. :) If someone is trolling my autohost and avoids kicking by vote(that will take about a minute each time that's quite annoying) i would be glad if someone from moderators get it and ban him.
Removing priviledges from moderators sounds like hiding user password from root for him not to abuse her :)

[oxnull]Lupus wrote:Removing priviledges from moderators sounds like hiding user password from root for him not to abuse her :)

Excuse me, exactly how is not giving access to your resources to random individuals similar to OS user hierarchy?

Moderator can ban someone from lobby. I.e. random individuals can just ban you. So why then must not be able to ban you on concrete autohost if they can do it global?

[oxnull]Lupus wrote:Moderator can ban someone from lobby. I.e. random individuals can just ban you. So why then must not be able to ban you on concrete autohost if they can do it global?

Because they are not the owners of said autohost. The lobby is only a relay.

Regret wrote:

[oxnull]Lupus wrote:Moderator can ban someone from lobby. I.e. random individuals can just ban you. So why then must not be able to ban you on concrete autohost if they can do it global?

Because they are not the owners of said autohost. The lobby is only a relay.

dunno :) i'm too lazy to reconfigure it anyway
btw, bibim, i convinced spring devs to provide autohost with endgame stats. Try to use it for balancing