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

New verification procedure #16

Open
christopherm99 opened this issue Jan 16, 2023 · 0 comments
Open

New verification procedure #16

christopherm99 opened this issue Jan 16, 2023 · 0 comments

Comments

@christopherm99
Copy link
Member

Currently, the verification system requires all users to be stored in the internal DataRes directory. This system is not sustainable, as many non-team members may want to join the discord server. Thus, the verification procedure must be updated with the following requirements:

  • For team members, the procedure must not change (ie. /iam + /verify must still suffice to log in registered users).
  • For unregistered team members, there should be some way to allow team leads to register them.
  • Non-team UCLA students who want to join should also have access to public channels (DataLearn, etc.).

To this end, I believe the /iam + /verify command should be updated as follows:

  • On first run of /iam, we require users to verify their @*.ucla.edu email, to verify they are a UCLA student.
    • If this user is found in the directory, we proceed as usual, adding their respective roles and information to the database.
    • Otherwise, we mark the user as verified (perhaps allowing them to access certain channels like DataLearn, etc.)
  • On subsequent runs of /iam, we no longer require users to use a @ucla.edu email, allowing users to have multiple associated emails, to check if they are in the directory under other emails.

Other nice to have features could include automatically updating usernames from the DataRes directory or allowing team heads to alter the directory from within Discord, based on requests to join teams.

@christopherm99 christopherm99 mentioned this issue Jan 17, 2023
4 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant