Pretty much as subject says - is this intended? Is okay by me if so, just was curious after I removed one (I was playing human and public service in the game, so no problem... heh)
Judging from the code, I think this is intended. The intention is to view the public player as some kind of superuser when it comes to multiplayer network games.
Sounds reasonable to me - I just thought I'd check, basically. :)
It's always been my understanding that "public service player == root" in the game.
I seem to remember a time when public_service could not always demolish player's things, but I welcome the change - or if it has always been this way, I welcome the updated info. hehehe