Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Disable CV Request Generator script on Meta #97

Closed
501st-alpha1 opened this issue Aug 8, 2017 · 3 comments
Closed

Disable CV Request Generator script on Meta #97

501st-alpha1 opened this issue Aug 8, 2017 · 3 comments

Comments

@501st-alpha1
Copy link

According to rene in chat here, SOCVR doesn't accept cv-pls / reopen-pls requests for Meta. Thus, I'd like to request that the CV Request Generator script be disabled on Meta sites.

@Tiny-Giant
Copy link
Contributor

The close vote request generator currently has a room list feature which allows you to add and remove target rooms for each site. As there is no guarantee that all users are using this solely for sending requests to the SOCVR, I don't think it would be appropriate to prevent the request generator from displaying on any given site. It may be more ideal to prevent SOCVR from being the default on any site other than Stack Overflow. This requires more discussion.

@makyen
Copy link
Contributor

makyen commented Aug 9, 2017

I'm currently working on updating the script. I had identified this as an issue and agree with @Tiny-Giant that the possibility that this script is being used by people to send requests from other sites to other chat rooms conflicts with just turning off the script on non-SOCVR moderated sites (i.e. everything other than stackoverflow.com).

I'm open to implementing whatever the consensus is that we should have.

I have currently implemented (but not yet filed a PR):

  1. An option that allows the user to disable showing the button for the CV-request GUI on all non-SOCVR moderated sites (i.e. everything other than stackoverflow.com). The default is that the button for the CV-request GUI is shown on all sites, retaining the current functionality.
  2. An option that on non-SOCVR moderated sites do both (default: not enabled, retains current functionality):
    1. Limit the type of requests which the user can select to [Smoke Detector (SD) !!/report, SD !!/reportuser, spam, and offensive]1.
    2. Select Charcoal HQ as the default chat room to send requests to, unless the user has selected a different chat room (through the normal room selection interface).
  3. Below the request preview (new functionality) a notice that SOCVR does not moderate the current site (if the target chat room is SOCVR). This is treated as just another type of request validation failure.2
  4. When the user clicks on "Send" to send a request to SOCVR from a non-SOCVR site, they will get a confirmation dialog stating that SOCVR does not moderate that site and asking them to confirm that they really want to send the request.2

For the options, changing the default behavior between enabled/disabled is trivial, should people feel the default should be set differently. The user, of course, can set the options as desired.


  1. There is new functionality that, under normal circumstances (i.e. on SO), the user can select the type of request message from: [cv-pls, reopen-pls, del-pls, undel-pls, Smoke Detector (SD) !!/report, SD !!/reportuser, spam, or offensive]. The default request-type is determine by if the request is about a question or answer (new functionality: request button on all answers) and the current status of the post (e.g. cv-pls for an open question, reopen-pls or del-pls for a closed question, undel-pls on a deleted question, del-pls/undel-pls on answers depending on their state).
  2. Request validation is a new feature. This is things like: request exceeds 500 characters; trying to send a reopen-pls on an open question; send a del-pls on a question or answer that can't be delete voted, etc. User is informed of the problem below the request preview and must click through a confirm dialog to actually send the request.

@makyen makyen self-assigned this Aug 28, 2017
@makyen
Copy link
Contributor

makyen commented Mar 4, 2023

Thanks for the report. This was resolved by switching the repository over to the 2.X version of the Request Generator, if not before. If it's still an issue, please post a new comment here, reopen this issue, or create a new issue.

@makyen makyen closed this as completed Mar 4, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants