Open osvein opened 9 years ago
There's a difference between permission denied and permission not granted. I think we should discuss whether such a command would deny everyone or revoke all granted permissions.
As per my understanding, denying someone blocks them from even sending a request.
As a player, I'd like to be able to make sure no one I have granted permission before suddenly teleport to me. However, I'd like to receive and review their request. Therefore I think such a command should revoke all granted permissions rather than denying everyone.
That being said, I also think the third way to respond (or more specifically not respond) to requests, ignorance, should be emphasized, as that is more likely to be what the request recipient wants to use, rather than denial.
This issue needs clarification through discussion. Hence the invalid and question labels.
You are correct, the presence of a denial token (pre-emptive or as a response) means any further requests will be ignored. This is to prevent an offensive player from spamming requests.
My suggestion is that "/tpn " is implemented as a quick way to delete any permission tokens for the issuing player, and (corresponding) "/tpy " is implemented as a quick way to delete any denial tokens for the issuing player. This would effectively reset to default and any further requests (/tpa) would be shown.
To clarify, "/tpn " should NOT be interpreted as "deny and squelch everyone", just as "/tpy " should NOT be interpreted as "allow everyone to tp freely". It should simply mean "forget I said yes/no, let me know next time someone asks".
How about a --clear
or --reverse
option that can be applied to /tpa
as well as /tpy
and /tpn
, to reverse an effect (i.e. deleting a token instead of creating it)? Or simply prefixing the player argument with -
or !
? Either way makes the intention is a bit clearer, and adds the ability to delete tokens for a specific player as well as everyone.
I would vote for --clear then. Anyway, is this really a feature that's needed? All tickets are automatically cleared after 60 minutes anyway. What is the actual use case?
Are you sure it's 60 minutes?
private final long cooldown = 86400 * 1000; // Milliseconds
Sorry. 24 hours. My mistake.
Users should be able to quickly tpn everyone by one single command.
Perhaps
/tpn *
?