Click here to edit contents of this page.
Click here to toggle editing of individual sections of the page (if possible). Watch headings for an "edit" link when available.
Append content without editing the whole page source.
Check out how this page has evolved in the past.
If you want to discuss contents of this page - this is the easiest way to do it.
View and manage file attachments for this page.
A few useful tools to manage this Site.
See pages that link to and include this page.
Change the name (also URL address, possibly the category) of the page.
View wiki source for this page without editing.
View/set parent page (used for creating breadcrumbs and structured layout).
Notify administrators if there is objectionable content in this page.
Something does not work as expected? Find out what you can do.
General Wikidot.com documentation and help section.
Wikidot.com Terms of Service - what you can, what you should not etc.
Wikidot.com Privacy Policy.
Since James opened the comments recently…
This need of course covers the private categories…
Yes, I got annoyed not being able to discuss the we needs. There's a couple of we needs that I felt we didn't need at all…
λ James Kanjo
Blog | Wikidot Expert | λ and Proud
Web Developer | HTML | CSS | JavaScript
Fully agreed.
I very deliberately did not open comments on weneeds to avoid creating Yet One More Issue Tracker.
Sigh. Oh well.
You have admin power on this site, feel free to delete / rework weneeds that don't make sense. I did that at the start but with over a hundred now, bleh… :-)
Portfolio
.
mod=moderator
If slaughterhouses had glass walls, everyone would be vegan. - Paul McCartney
I think we ended up deciding that this extra permissions level would be called "trusted members" ? I don't see the discussion on this page, so it must have taken place somewhere else.
When this is implemented, it'd be great if there were at least two extra levels added.
One extra level might be enough, but in the future if someone requires that extra level, it will already be there and they won't need to request it. Surely adding two additional levels isn't much harder than adding one additional level? :)
Thanks,
~ Leiger - Wikidot Community Admin - Volunteer
Wikidot: Official Documentation
Initially this weneed asked for "trusted" members but it seemed clear to me that adding 2 levels would be more work than adding N levels.
So the proper design is IMO to add arbitrary user groups, with arbitrary permissions and names, and then the site admins can promote users gradually. Very valuable for building a community.
Portfolio
No, as the author of this weneed, I meant for example "sales department" or "board" or "accounting department".
I was referring to the original discussion on this topic, not this page in particular.
~ Leiger - Wikidot Community Admin - Volunteer
Wikidot: Official Documentation
Sorry :-) Yes, arbitrary named user groups is the way to go IMO. If you had asked for a trusted user group I'd have edited it to be as you actually did write it.
/Don't know if that sentence made much sense. Need coffee.
Portfolio
Oh, arbitrary would be great!!
I just thought that you said somewhere it was impossible, or too difficult to do, because the current levels had already been hard-coded in and future access levels would need to be the same way.
~ Leiger - Wikidot Community Admin - Volunteer
Wikidot: Official Documentation
I think the discussion you're thinking of is here: http://blog.wikidot.com/wiki:if-module
-Ed
Community Admin
I'v just started a school community site (notes from lectures, other materials), i wish this feature to :)
mainly for creating groups of students.
Bartłomiej Bąkowski @ Wikidot Inc.
';.;' TeRq (Write PM)
This being rejected is an enormous blow to the notion of making social applications within wikidot. Which is sad, because with data forms evolving, listpages and live templates and private categories, we were getting REALLY close to something amazing.
It's also one of the most popular weneeds, both here and at the community's old wishlist.
… and one the most hard to do. Probably no-one wants a total stop of Wikidot development for 3 months just to add custom user groups.
Piotr Gabryjeluk
visit my blog
Actually, I could live with 6 mos, even 9. 12 if you completed Data forms before starting it.
Someday I'll spend some time writing up what could be done with private user categories in the context of social application-making, and what it could mean for wikidot. For now, I'll just ask you to reconsider the "rejection" and put it back in the open. There is an enormous amount of potential here.
Why is this wish rejected????
If slaughterhouses had glass walls, everyone would be vegan. - Paul McCartney
Hey Brunhilda, please look at the 3 comments above yours… it was explained there. I am disappointed to see this as well, but your question has been answered.
~ Leiger - Wikidot Community Admin - Volunteer
Wikidot: Official Documentation
Indeed, it will take too much time to implement this and just a few users would use it (according to the stats saying that most of our users do not have members on their sites at all), so - sorry to say that - spending couple of weeks of our working time to make a feature for the few would be just a loss.
@Squark, Maybe one reason that you don't see the stats is that nobody that needs multiple user-groups can use Wikidot.
Wikidot is very good for bridging the gap between a dumb web-server and a full LAMP platform, but it's implementation even of Blogs and Fora is a long way behind the state of the art.
So it is no surprise that most of your users are using it to host a pure web-site. If they need user-groups, they will discount Wikidot immediately and go to webs.com, LeFora or some other provider
In the vast majority of cases where the raison-d'etre of the site is person-to-person communication, multiple user groups is a basic requirement. The last time I considered something like this I could work my way around it… by making every member create a private site of their own and linking them all up together, but in the end we went elsewhere. That might happen a lot more often than you realise.
It's only those of us on these fora that are thinking of what Wikidot might become. LeFora make the point that only about one in a thousand of their customers post on the support forum to support or challenge any change in service. The others just put up with it or leave.
By definition, your current user-base does not use multiple user groups, and so you can not use them for evidence. You will never know how many prospective users you have lost by not supporting multiple user groups. The only indication you have is the popularity of this wish. You do need to consider the silent majority, of course you do, but you should also consider that over 40 votes on here is a huge opinion that may indicate a wider market than you currently serve.
Good post rurwin.
The current version of Wikidot is eventually going to be open sourced. When that happens, this kind of thing might become a reality as there will be a far larger user group available to work on this.
Assuming the core Wikidot developers are able to work closely with community-based developers, they can share the workload on huge upgrades like this one and perhaps get it done in far less than the predicted 3 months Gabrys suggested it would take.
~ Leiger - Wikidot Community Admin - Volunteer
Wikidot: Official Documentation
Please implement the user groups, or the ability to assign specific user permissions to a specific category. Or allow us to create custom permission groups and assign users to those.
I think this is a NEEDED Feature, as sometimes one has a Sub Group or individual USER GROUP (Special Interest Group, Moderators and/or Administrators, … ), to cater for within a Wiki.
Alternative:
Currently, the (only) other alternative would be to create a completely new Wiki for that purpose, which is very often an OVERKILL !
Peter-ZA