►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Sometimes,
as
some
people
have
reporter
access,
and
they
should
have
some
other
access
so
like
they're,
using
some
of
the
permissions
kind
of
they
can
move
them
in
order
to
kind
of
have
a
bigger
overlap
with
what
they
want
and
then
some
of
the
things
it's
like.
In
our
case,
a
reporter
shouldn't
shouldn't
be
able
to
do
XYZ,
and
then
we
can
add
that
to
the
product
we
can
have
like
hey
a
reporter
shouldn't,
be
able
to
do
XYZ
the
alternative
and
the
thing
that
customers
tend
to
ask
for
hey.
A
We
just
want
to
define
our
own
level
of
users.
I
said
like
want
to
introduce
a
new
user
level.
I,
don't
know,
project
lead
and
the
project
lead
can
do
XYZ
and
XYZ
and
I.
Think
that's
a
super
tough
one,
because
what
you
tend
to
get
is
that
it
becomes
very
unclear
for
the
people
in
the
organization.
Whatever
user
can
do,
you
tend
to
get
people
that
are
restricted
to
sets
of
rights
that
don't
don't
make
a
lot
of
sense.
It's
super
hard
to
define
appropriate
levels
and
we
can
add
more
levels
to
get
lap.
A
So
if
we
find
the
same
thing
coming
back
multiple
times
or
there's
just
a
customer
that
has
a
use
case
and
what
I
can't
we're
totally
not
able
to
address
that
we're
open
to
like
introducing
new
levels
allowing
people
to
customize
it
which
you
you
gain
something
you
get
give
them
the
flexibility
they
ask
for
it.
What
you
tend
to
get
with
products
that
allow
that,
if
you
can
tend
to
have
administrators
that
set
default
stores
that
are
not
practical
for
people
and
it's
super
hard
to
find
that
out
what
is
practical
for
people?
A
What
rights
do
people
need,
and
it's
a
lot
of
work
and
it's
work
that
we
as
a
company
should
do.
We
cannot
kind
of
farm
that
out
to
our
customers
and
say
well,
we'll
just
give
you
the
flexibility.
You'll
do
an
awesome
job
at
it.
No,
it's
super
super
hard
to
figure
out
what
good
trade-offs
are
there
and
it's
work
that
we
should
take
on.
So
a
lot
of
open-source
software
tends
to
suffer
from
option
itis,
where
it's
just
options
all
over
the
product.
A
We're
getting
pay
to
not
add
options
but
to
remove
options,
but
do
it
in
a
way
that
everyone
can
still
kind
of
do
their
use
case,
but
that's
what
we're
getting
paid
for
and
I
mean
in
products
with
that
allow
kind
of
infinite
customization
of
authorizations.
You
tend
to
find
that
people
are
restricted
too
much
like
they
don't
have
the
rights
they
should
have
they
it's
inconsistent.
They
can
do
some
things.
A
They
should
be
able
to
do
other
things
to
kind
of
complete
their
job,
but
they
can't
it's
hard
to
kind
of
have
a
conversation
in
the
company,
because
also
the
naming
is
confusing.
There's
way
too
many
levels,
things
like
that
and
it's
kind
of
hard
to
support
them.
If
they
have
questions
it's
hard
for
them
to
Google
stuff
because,
like
their
things,
are
called
different
than
other
people's
things,
so
in
the
end
it's
it's
software
you
can.
A
That
should
be
a
last
resort.
In
general,
we
should
just
make
sure
the
product,
the
right
thing
out
of
the
box
and
asking
every
asking
customers
to
kind
of
introduce
their
own
levels
and
put
their
own
permissions
I
think
is
stepping
away
from
that
super
hard
work
and
saying:
oh
well,
the
customer
can
can
do
it
and
then
yeah
great
you
as
a
product
manager.
You
won't
have
any
questions
anymore
because
they
can
do
it,
but
you'll
have
you'll,
introduce
a
lot
of
pain
for
the
users
of
that
instance
and
I.