akalatheory wrote:I wasn't aware my question would be judged so harshly, and especially by someone whose rank says they were a former team member for phpBB. Because I would like the option, is that ok? Or is that wrong? If it's wrong, I can always switch to another forum system that has that function and stop supporting phpBB. I've been a loyal fan and supporter of phpBB for a long time, and to be questioned as to why I would need something like that, I have to say I'm very deeply offended.
That's a bit thin-skinned. I don't think that Erik was either "judging" or "harsh". He was simply asking why setting a policy stating that staff shouldn't edit other staff members' posts wouldn't be sufficient. He was further stating that if you can't trust your staff to follow the rules, you shouldn't make them staff in the first place. How is that judgmental or harsh?
The point is that MODs, especially in phpBB 3.0, can cause problems with updates, so if you can avoid adding a MOD to your system, you should. I've seen people say that they won't upgrade to phpBB 3.1 because they have so many MODs on their boards (one person that I know of claims over 100!).
P.S. There is also no such thing as a "root admin". Do you mean a Founder or somebody with access to the site's files beyond the ACP? (For most boards, they're probably the same thing, but they don't have to be.)