Subject: New permissions

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 5 May 1993 10:22:26 -0700

It seems to me that if you want a 'sub-wiz' class, you could simply make a
programmer class with some canned wiz-perm verbs (including a @list and @edit),
and change $perm_utils:controls to
return args[1] == args[2].owner || args[1].wizard ||
       parent(args[1]) == $nearwiz;

or something like that (it isn't THAT simple, you have to look for loopholes,
too).  I personally don't like the idea of layers and layers of hardcoded
security.  If you must resort to hardcoded means to prevent wizards from doing
stuff, consider resigning as Archwiz.  You aren't really doing your job.  You
can't blame it on anyone else.  YOU are the one that is in charge of anyone you
could blame.

Cassnak@lambdamoo
Kade@Monohaze
[email-masked]
John Smart @ RL

---

From: Judy Anderson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 May 1993 10:36:37 -0700

Note that on LambdaMOO we have already done similar things, though
done with rooms rather than programmer classes.  There's the Star
Chamber, which lets members of the Architecture Review Board look at
things like other people's quota, and the Registrar's Office, which
lets registrars create new players and do various administrative tasks
related to registration.  These all rely on being !x to ensure
security of "player" and then check that player is in the approved
list of people to execute the command.