#2803 - Unvalidating and then revalidating content results in earning more points
-
By PDStig
- Added
- 4 views
| Identifier | #2803 |
|---|---|
| Issue type | Minor issue (breaks specific functionality) |
| Title | Unvalidating and then revalidating content results in earning more points |
| Status | Completed |
| Tags |
Good for training (custom) |
| Handling member | PDStig |
| Addon | points |
| Description | This was only tested on polls. But if I create a poll, then it later gets unvalidated, then I revalidate it... Composr acts like I added another poll and syndicates activity / awards more points. |
| Steps to reproduce | 1. Add a poll (make sure there's at least 2 that exist). 2. Delete the poll that is in use. 3. Revalidate / make in use one of the other existing polls.
You are again awarded points / activity is syndicated as if the poll was new. |
| Funded? | No |
The system will post a comment when this issue is modified (e.g., status changes). To be notified of this, click "Enable comment notifications".
Comments
I'll keep this here as a possible improving, for us to add that tracking.
I think it'd be pretty easy - just look to see if an Action Log message exists for validating that content type+ID combination, and if so, don't give points again.
The issue in general raised a lot of questions, and Patrick and I discussed. I decided to just handle it myself.
1) This issue is specific to polls. It should not be a thing that non-privileged users are setting polls. The polls CMS is based on mid-impact permissions which generally makes sense (we want to encourage user submission of this content on many community sites), but not for SETTING the poll, or for EDITING IT. So I have resolved this issue by having the default installation override the mid-impact validation/self-content-editing privileges for poll CMS to be off for any non-staff usergroup.
2) We questioned why we assign points based on submission, not based on submitting-as-validated/subsequent-validation, and tracking it so that the points are only assigned once. The reasoning is that we are not trying to reward ACCEPTABLE submissions, we are trying to award EFFORT. If staff then want to come in and give extra points, or take some points away for spammy content (which they can easily do on the member punish form), they have the choice to do this.
3) We questioned why there is no action-log tracking for when content is validated. Tracking of all changes would be achieved via #2119, so we shouldn't be looking into adding specific validation logging at this point.