• 4
    • 2
    • Our product teams collect and evaluate feedback from a number of different sources. To learn more about how we use customer feedback in the planning process, check out our new feature policy.

      NOTE: This suggestion is for Confluence Cloud. Using Confluence Server? See the corresponding suggestion.

      Request for more granular control over questions permissions. Rather than a single 'Can Use' customer would like to be able to define groups that can view, comment and vote on questions, but not ask or answer.

      Public FAQ would be one use case for this.

      See comments:https://confluence.atlassian.com/display/QUESTIONS/Permissions?focusedCommentId=462716960#comment-462716960

      I was wondering if there's a way to limit the number of features a (logged in) user can have.
      E.g. to allow only: reading , voting and commenting q&s? (everything apart from sumbitting own questions and answering ones)

      To be more specific: I'd need to have two user groups (none of them can by anonymous). The first one (an active one) should have permission to post questions, answer, vote, comment etc.
      The other one (let's call it - passive) should be given only access to view questions/answers and vote/comment them.
      I'm aware this is closer to classic faq solution, but was wondering if using "Confluence Questions" may be a benefit here OR it would be more wise to leverage pure Confluence pages.

            [CONFCLOUD-48392] Granular permissions for questions

            This is definitely an important piece that is missing for us too. As Enis suggested, 'Manage Topics' is a key set of permissions.

            carolyn french added a comment - This is definitely an important piece that is missing for us too. As Enis suggested, 'Manage Topics' is a key set of permissions.

            I can only add to the chorus here. Granular permission only make sense. We currently comparing Confluence Q&A to other products, and ability to grant granular permissions is something that's really missing.

            Gene Fichtenholz added a comment - I can only add to the chorus here. Granular permission only make sense. We currently comparing Confluence Q&A to other products, and ability to grant granular permissions is something that's really missing.

            F added a comment -

            We are also interested in more granular permissions. For example we have spaces where everyone has read access to the space but we do not want the questions and answers to show up in the global questions.

            I think it would be ideal if we could configure the permissions (like view, vote, answer) individually for each space and independently from the permission to view a space.

            F added a comment - We are also interested in more granular permissions. For example we have spaces where everyone has read access to the space but we do not want the questions and answers to show up in the global questions. I think it would be ideal if we could configure the permissions (like view, vote, answer) individually for each space and independently from the permission to view a space.

            Granular control of User permissions is highly desirable at my organization. Reputation based permissions only partly satisfies our requirements.

            It would also be desirable to be able to grant access to the statistics tab to select users without having to grant global administrator permissions.

            Thanks!

            Ryan McIver added a comment - Granular control of User permissions is highly desirable at my organization. Reputation based permissions only partly satisfies our requirements. It would also be desirable to be able to grant access to the statistics tab to select users without having to grant global administrator permissions. Thanks!

            Having a separate "Manage Topics" permission would be awesome. We need only a small group who will be able to edit topic watchers or mark a topic as "featured", not everyone.

            Enis Günesen added a comment - Having a separate "Manage Topics" permission would be awesome. We need only a small group who will be able to edit topic watchers or mark a topic as "featured", not everyone.

            MikeyS added a comment -

            Similar to Scott's request above, I'd also like to see granularity for administrative permissions in Questions as well. (Specifically, I'm interested in the manage topics permission.)

            MikeyS added a comment - Similar to Scott's request above, I'd also like to see granularity for administrative permissions in Questions as well. (Specifically, I'm interested in the manage topics permission.)

            We would also like to be able to define a small group of people who are not site admins for Confluence, but effectively admins within just Questions. Heavy-handed curation abilities for internal knowledge base: a broad ability to modify votes, manage topics, watch lists, etc.

            Scott Bilas added a comment - We would also like to be able to define a small group of people who are not site admins for Confluence, but effectively admins within just Questions. Heavy-handed curation abilities for internal knowledge base: a broad ability to modify votes, manage topics, watch lists, etc.

              Unassigned Unassigned
              rrobins Rachel Robins
              Votes:
              35 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              34 Start watching this issue

                Created:
                Updated: