Membership actions (kick/invite) carried out by unbridged Matrix admins do not bridge to WA through other users

[anoadragon453]

Consider a Matrix room bridged to WhatsApp with two individuals on the Matrix side:

• Alice, an admin in the Matrix room. Alice has not bridged their account to WhatsApp.
• Bob, also an admin in the Matrix room. Bob has bridged their account to WhatsApp. Bob's bridged WA account is a Group Admin in the WhatsApp group.
• Alice invites Charlie (WA), a WhatsApp puppet user to the room. The puppet does not join, because Alice does not have a bridged WhatsApp account. Although the bridge could have potentially used Bob's bridged account to perform the action.

Alice uninvites Charlie and instead Bob invites Charlie. The Charlie (WA) puppet joins the room, and Charlie is added to the group on WhatsApp.

Eventually it turns out Charlie isn't suited for this group, and Alice - a Matrix room admin - removes the Charlie (WA) puppet on Matrix. The puppet is removed from the room on Matrix, but Charlie is still in the room on WhatsApp (!). If Charlie sends a message now, the puppet will re-join the room.

Only if Bob removes the Charlie (WA) puppet from the Matrix room, does Charlie get removed from the group on WhatsApp.

Could it / should it (with an option?) be the case that if Alice performs one of the above actions - especially kicking - that the bridge should perform that action through an available bridged account?

I recognise that the power levels in the Matrix room do not match that of WhatsApp (and not all users in the room are bridged). Our primary use case is having a series of Matrix users talking through a relaybot to WhatsApp (and other networks), thus there will really only be one Matrix user in the room with a bridged WA account (the relaybot).

[tulir]

That's a lot of words for a simple "moderation actions should be bridged through the relaybot" feature request :P

[anoadragon453]

But now you have reproduction steps! Reproduction steps!!1