SUMO community discussions

[MIGRATION] Roles

  • 9 Replies
  • Last reply by vesper
  1. vesper
    vesper 1182 posts
    more options

    Hi everyone,

    This is a part of the migration process that we appreciate your feedback on.

    We already have a few roles in SUMO

    ROLES: Description A role would be awarded manually, unlike ranks and badges (that would be automated), at the discretion of Admins and the community. Roles would include access to limited/restricted platform features like editing/deleting some site or user content. So, roles would make a difference in what you can / cannot do within the site and the community. Getting a role would mean agreeing to certain responsibilities and roles would be unassigned if a user with a role abused the power or stopped contributing to SUMO for extended periods of time. We want to keep it as simple as possible, so at start we'll migrate the roles we require for the community to work properly - but we are open to ideas for new roles, if you have good reasons to create them.

    Currently / in Kitsune We use groups to manage some of the platform permissions. In general, the following are the most important ones for us at the moment:

    • Contributor - the basic role for any registered user, since anyone with an account can contribute to SUMO
    • Trusted contributor - a special role assigned to active contributors who need to bypass the automatic limitation to the number of posts that can be made per day
    • Moderator - a special role for trusted contributors who can manage user threads and posts in the forums
    • Reviewer - a special role for trusted contributors who can approve or revert knowledge base changes
    • Admin - for Mozilla staff only, aka "superuser access" - a special role that allows for the management and setting up of the whole community

    Please note: some aspects of SUMO (e.g. social support via Sprinklr) are using their own permissions.

    These are the very basics, and we will discuss the development for this aspect of our platform in this thread.

    • What do you think about the above?
    • What would you like to see on the new platform for this aspect of our community?
    Hi everyone, This is a part of the migration process that we appreciate your feedback on. We already have a few roles in SUMO '''ROLES:''' '''Description''' A role would be awarded '''manually''', unlike ranks and badges (that would be automated), at the discretion of Admins and the community. Roles would include access to limited/restricted platform features like editing/deleting some site or user content. So, roles '''would''' make a difference in what you can / cannot do within the site and the community. Getting a role would mean agreeing to certain responsibilities and roles would be unassigned if a user with a role abused the power or stopped contributing to SUMO for extended periods of time. We want to keep it as simple as possible, so at start we'll migrate the roles we require for the community to work properly - but we are open to ideas for new roles, if you have good reasons to create them. '''Currently / in Kitsune''' We use [https://support.mozilla.org/groups groups] to manage some of the platform permissions. In general, the following are the most important ones for us at the moment: * Contributor - the basic role for any registered user, since anyone with an account can contribute to SUMO * Trusted contributor - a special role assigned to active contributors who need to bypass the automatic limitation to the number of posts that can be made per day * Moderator - a special role for trusted contributors who can manage user threads and posts in the forums * Reviewer - a special role for trusted contributors who can approve or revert knowledge base changes * Admin - for Mozilla staff only, aka "superuser access" - a special role that allows for the management and setting up of the whole community Please note: some aspects of SUMO (e.g. social support via Sprinklr) are using their own permissions. These are the very basics, and we will discuss the development for this aspect of our platform in this thread. * What do you think about the above? * What would you like to see on the new platform for this aspect of our community?
  2. philipp
    philipp 1303 posts
    more options

    similar to what i've posted in the gamification thread already, i think it would also have its charms if we could assign a role similar to our current "trusted contributor" model automatically once a user gets over a certain "quality"-threshold (measured by solutions or helpful answers) which may unlock some features like lifted rate-limiting... currently on kitsune this is a rather painful process since we tempt to "ban" very active new users with loads of replies in a short amount of time until an admin white-lists them.

    similar to what i've posted in the gamification thread already, i think it would also have its charms if we could assign a role similar to our current "trusted contributor" model '''automatically '''once a user gets over a certain "quality"-threshold (measured by solutions or helpful answers) which may unlock some features like lifted rate-limiting... currently on kitsune this is a rather painful process since we tempt to "ban" very active new users with loads of replies in a short amount of time until an admin white-lists them.
  3. jscher2000 - Support Volunteer
    jscher2000 - Support Volunteer 834 posts
    more options

    I agree with the above. No need to overdo at the beginning.

    I agree with the above. No need to overdo at the beginning.
  4. Chandan_Baba
    Chandan_Baba 79 posts
    more options

    philipp said

    similar to what i've posted in the gamification thread already, i think it would also have its charms if we could assign a role similar to our current "trusted contributor" model automatically once a user gets over a certain "quality"-threshold (measured by solutions or helpful answers) which may unlock some features like lifted rate-limiting... currently on kitsune this is a rather painful process since we tempt to "ban" very active new users with loads of replies in a short amount of time until an admin white-lists them.

    Similar like getting a badge after certain number of tweet done or localize docs. +1 for Phillips

    ''philipp [[#post-70264|said]]'' <blockquote> similar to what i've posted in the gamification thread already, i think it would also have its charms if we could assign a role similar to our current "trusted contributor" model '''automatically '''once a user gets over a certain "quality"-threshold (measured by solutions or helpful answers) which may unlock some features like lifted rate-limiting... currently on kitsune this is a rather painful process since we tempt to "ban" very active new users with loads of replies in a short amount of time until an admin white-lists them. </blockquote> Similar like getting a badge after certain number of tweet done or localize docs. +1 for Phillips
  5. John99
    John99 3665 posts
    more options

    You mention Reviewers. So this is part of the topic you brought up. What you do not mention is that Contributors are also Editors of the KB.

    • Can you confirm that will continue to be the case in the new Platform.
    • We will still have community owned and posted KB articles won't we ?
      • Rather than KB articles owned and posted by specific individuals.

    I realise that detailed discussion of that will no doubt have to wait until later but presumably Admins already are aware of high level plans and specifications that Contributors are still unaware of.

    Trusted contributor Why not try to give a trusted contributor some additional power. It has been mentioned there will be improved thread control tools. Will we still have problems with duplicated posts or post that are very clearly in the wrong section. If that is the case maybe we could consider allowing trusted contributors to deal with those. Contributors will already flag a duplicate and cross link it. I think it would be good to allow such a contributor to move or lock a post in those circumstances. Mistakes are probably unlikely, but could easily be undone. Even if such powers are not conferred on Trusted contributors then maybe flagging duplicates correctly is something that should be rewarded.

    You mention '''Reviewers'''. So this is part of the topic you brought up. What you do not mention is that '''Contributors''' are also '''Editors''' of the KB. * Can you confirm that will continue to be the case in the new Platform. *We will still have community owned and posted KB articles won't we ? ** Rather than KB articles owned and posted by specific individuals. I realise that detailed discussion of that will no doubt have to wait until later but presumably Admins already are aware of high level plans and specifications that Contributors are still unaware of. ------- '''Trusted contributor''' Why not try to give a trusted contributor some additional power. It has been mentioned there will be improved thread control tools. Will we still have problems with duplicated posts or post that are very clearly in the wrong section. If that is the case maybe we could consider allowing trusted contributors to deal with those. Contributors will already flag a duplicate and cross link it. I think it would be good to allow such a contributor to move or lock a post in those circumstances. Mistakes are probably unlikely, but could easily be undone. Even if such powers are not conferred on Trusted contributors then maybe flagging duplicates correctly is something that should be rewarded.
  6. AliceWyman
    AliceWyman 6315 posts
    more options

    John99 said

    What you do not mention is that Contributors are also Editors of the KB.
    • Can you confirm that will continue to be the case in the new Platform.
    • We will still have community owned and posted KB articles won't we ?
      • Rather than KB articles owned and posted by specific individuals.

    I'd also like this cleared up. I thought that the SUMO KB would continue as before, with KB editors and reviewers from the community working side by side with Mozilla employees to write, edit and review "official" Mozilla Support KB articles.

    I haven't been following the migration discussion that closely. Where was "KB articles owned and posted by specific individuals" brought up? That sounds more like the "User tips" feature used by Apple, where trusted contributors can post their own documents in its Support Communities, like this user tip, https://discussions.apple.com/docs/DOC-9581 for example. Apple's user tips are are in addition to the "official" Apple support documents such as https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204350

    ''John99 [[#post-70271|said]]'' <blockquote> What you do not mention is that '''Contributors''' are also '''Editors''' of the KB. * Can you confirm that will continue to be the case in the new Platform. *We will still have community owned and posted KB articles won't we ? ** Rather than KB articles owned and posted by specific individuals. </blockquote> I'd also like this cleared up. I thought that the SUMO KB would continue as before, with KB editors and reviewers from the community working side by side with Mozilla employees to write, edit and review "official" Mozilla Support KB articles. I haven't been following the migration discussion that closely. Where was "KB articles owned and posted by specific individuals" brought up? That sounds more like the [https://discussions.apple.com/thread/7561420 "User tips" feature] used by Apple, where trusted contributors can post their own documents in its Support Communities, like this user tip, https://discussions.apple.com/docs/DOC-9581 for example. Apple's user tips are are in addition to the "official" Apple support documents such as https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204350
  7. vesper
    vesper 1182 posts
    more options

    Apologies for not making it explicit that editing the KB will function the same way it is now. I don't think we ever mentioned any KB articles being "owned" by anyone and not editable by everyone.

    Any user should be able to flag posts as spam or abuse. We could have more granular forum admin powers (e.g. a "Junior Moderator" would be able to hide flagged posts, but only a "Moderator" would have the power to delete them and ban an offending user).

    A full matrix of Roles and "powers" is something that will be shared in this thread this week, hopefully - once we get an even better grasp of the system.

    Thank you for your thoughts - keep them coming!

    Apologies for not making it explicit that editing the KB will function the same way it is now. I don't think we ever mentioned any KB articles being "owned" by anyone and not editable by everyone. Any user should be able to flag posts as spam or abuse. We could have more granular forum admin powers (e.g. a "Junior Moderator" would be able to hide flagged posts, but only a "Moderator" would have the power to delete them and ban an offending user). A full matrix of Roles and "powers" is something that will be shared in this thread this week, hopefully - once we get an even better grasp of the system. Thank you for your thoughts - keep them coming!
  8. John99
    John99 3665 posts
    more options

    Thanks for the reply Michał,

    Apologies for not making it explicit that editing the KB will function the same way it is now. I don't think we ever mentioned any KB articles being "owned" by anyone and not editable by everyone.

    OK clarification noted & that is welcome news. I am trying to make constructive comments, and do realise there is a tight timeline for all of this, although apparently the discussion deadlines are not as tight as first appeared.

    Great that you are considering other more granular roles/permissions like junior moderator. As you are aware the current report abuse button is a actually used for other purposes than just reporting abuse.

    Apologies for asking silly questions, but I am just trying to clarify what at times seems to be conflicting information or lack of information.

    Reasons for Confusion

    I feel the main problem is Admins and Contributors are probably not following the same documentation, demonstrations & training. That leads to each of us makes differing presumptions and adds to the communications breakdown.

    I appreciate Admins can not cover everything but am also aware there will be inevitable changes when migrating to Lithium. After reading the Lithium training notes I was given it did appear Sumo would have to accept & was planning a model more like what we know occurs on some other Lithium fora.

    The KB article demonstrating the showfor was apparently such a TKB owned by a specific person. The canned responses training relates to your own personal canned responses not community ones. I did try to ask about this in a separate thread that Madalina had replied in as I prefer to not drag a thread off topic, but that is still awaiting a response.

    (link} In fact the faq section you linked to is about 14 articles with subsections. Reading through that I have quite a few questions. Some of those would be questions about the details shown and no doubt it would be said those are not yet finalised. However some questions are high level questions about features or concepts. Where are we to discus this ?

    I have commented further in that thread and it would be appreciated if you could look at that. Thanks again.

    Thanks for the reply Michał, <blockquote>Apologies for not making it explicit that editing the KB will function the same way it is now. I don't think we ever mentioned any KB articles being "owned" by anyone and not editable by everyone.</blockquote> OK clarification noted & that is welcome news. I am trying to make constructive comments, and do realise there is a tight timeline for all of this, although apparently the discussion deadlines are not as tight as first appeared. Great that you are considering other more granular roles/permissions like junior moderator. As you are aware the current report abuse button is a actually used for other purposes than just reporting abuse. ------------- Apologies for asking silly questions, but I am just trying to clarify what at times seems to be conflicting information or lack of information. === Reasons for Confusion=== '''I feel the main problem is Admins and Contributors are probably not following the same documentation, demonstrations & training.''' That leads to each of us makes differing presumptions and adds to the communications breakdown. I appreciate Admins can not cover everything but am also aware there will be inevitable changes when migrating to Lithium. After reading the Lithium training notes I was given it did appear Sumo would have to accept & was planning a model more like what we know occurs on some other Lithium fora. The KB article demonstrating the showfor was apparently such a TKB owned by a specific person. The canned responses training relates to your own personal canned responses not community ones. I did try to ask about this in a separate thread that Madalina had replied in as I prefer to not drag a thread off topic, but that is still awaiting a response. <blockquote>([https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/forums/contributors/712179?last=70272#post-70272 link]} In fact the faq section you linked to is about 14 articles with subsections. Reading through that I have quite a few questions. Some of those would be questions about the details shown and no doubt it would be said those are not yet finalised. However some questions are high level questions about features or concepts. Where are we to discus this ? </blockquote> I have commented further in that thread and it would be appreciated if you could look at that. Thanks again.
  9. Matt
    Matt 171 posts
    more options

    vesper said

    A full matrix of Roles and "powers" is something that will be shared in this thread this week, hopefully - once we get an even better grasp of the system.

    Does no post mean they are still not decided?

    ''vesper [[#post-70298|said]]'' <blockquote> A full matrix of Roles and "powers" is something that will be shared in this thread this week, hopefully - once we get an even better grasp of the system. </blockquote> Does no post mean they are still not decided?
  10. vesper
    vesper 1182 posts
    more options

    Matt powiedział

    vesper said
    A full matrix of Roles and "powers" is something that will be shared in this thread this week, hopefully - once we get an even better grasp of the system.

    Does no post mean they are still not decided?

    Hi Matt,

    I have posted them a while ago on the public Lithium migration trello board - direct link

    ''Matt [[#post-70574|powiedział]]'' <blockquote> ''vesper [[#post-70298|said]]'' <blockquote> A full matrix of Roles and "powers" is something that will be shared in this thread this week, hopefully - once we get an even better grasp of the system. </blockquote> Does no post mean they are still not decided? </blockquote> Hi Matt, I have posted them a while ago on the [https://trello.com/b/ZZKj4vDw/sumo-lithium-migration-public-board public Lithium migration trello board] - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_limLyuwfKwAVvrJd-0dkP7xjDwUGzrm1EVvI9QGWT0/edit# direct link]