inviting people into private chat

posted
Total Posts
228
This is a feature request. Feature requests can be voted up by supporters.
Current Priority: +3,766
show more
Ableh
support this
she_old

Kanye West wrote:

What's the difference between this and a third-party program such as Skype?
Skype (usually) doesn't get logged by someone not in the chat
primrose
Support (I don't have any star :o )
Lally
bump o3o more support here
D33d
No stars, but supporting. Not everybody wants to switch to a separate chat client for the sake of having a small group chat.
ieb
Great idea
Miya
I like this, support :3
We can also do tag modding by this private chat, oh i love to see it. Having different channel to discuss an issue is kinda anoying =3=
Dark_Ai
yap yap a f*cking nice idea
Huskatron
+1
Kirino Kousaka

Ephemeral wrote:

This would be useful for IRC modding collab maps.
Wow, I've been wanting this. And finally here are people with the same idea \:D/ Support.
Shinzui
Here, have 8 stars. This would be perfect.
nrl

theowest wrote:

There must be an limit of some sort. Or else this would start to require moderating if things happen.
If the channels are created by users they can be self moderated by the user who created the channel by simply restricting the channel to be invite-only. The creator of the channel could have the power to silence users within the channel, remove users from the channel, blacklist users from the channel, limit the size of the channel, set whether invites can come only from the creator of the channel or from any player in the channel, and pass control of the channel to another user within the channel. Self-contained, non-persistent, private, and self-moderated. I don't see any problem with it other than implementation, and while this obviously isn't a super critical thing to have it would be a really nice feature if it were implemented that would surely see plenty of use.
shARPII
go go for this feature!
(have 3 stars for this)
Maneuver
support
Graphite Edge
support +1
Bobbias

NarrillNezzurh wrote:

theowest wrote:

There must be an limit of some sort. Or else this would start to require moderating if things happen.
If the channels are created by users they can be self moderated by the user who created the channel by simply restricting the channel to be invite-only. The creator of the channel could have the power to silence users within the channel, remove users from the channel, blacklist users from the channel, limit the size of the channel, set whether invites can come only from the creator of the channel or from any player in the channel, and pass control of the channel to another user within the channel. Self-contained, non-persistent, private, and self-moderated. I don't see any problem with it other than implementation, and while this obviously isn't a super critical thing to have it would be a really nice feature if it were implemented that would surely see plenty of use.
You've hit the nail on the head. By default on any IRC server you are allowed to freely create rooms on (or at east every one I've been on) when you create a new room, you are appointed mod immediately, giving you full moderation privilege across the room. Hell, technically speaking someone could actually write a an IRC moderation bot that can log into bancho and moderate their room automatically. It would involve having the bot log in as an existing account, or require making a new account, but it stands to reason that this is perfectly doable and probably a good idea if private chat rooms were to be allowed.

Furthermore, I avoid most chat here specifically because I can't stand what happens when you have too many people in a room. It devolves into absurdities and immature garbage. I hang out in #osumania partly because I spend more time playing mania than standard, and partly because it's the only chat I can participate in that doesn't drive me mad. Small chat rooms between groups of friends allows people like myself to actually be social on a platform that otherwise would drive them away.

I've seen quite a few times where a bunch of my friends would all spectate someone just so we could chat in a private room. We shouldn't have to resort to abusing the system just to communicate in small groups.
ityka
Agree wholeheartedly with Bobbias above. actually somewhat surprised this feature isnt already in the game, as the feature exists in a standard irc channel, so I dont envision this as being too hard to implement. the quality of chat channels seriously degrade after a certain point, and it would be great to have somewhere not skype where you can chat to multiple friends at the same time.
peppy
Using #spectator is not "abusing the system". Please continue to do so (or use #multiplayer).
ityka
although multi and spectator are places where this is possible I'd like to be able to be to soloplay while still chatting with my friends in a chatroom. I spend most of my playing time solo playing, which a lot of people do, but I'd still like to chat inbetween retries and whatnot. in multi you're stuck playing the song the other people wants to, and they might be on very different skill level than you so you cannot possibly play the songs your friends can, and in addition to this its restricted to 8 people. in spectator you yourself cannot play, mod or do anything besides spectating and chatting.

In my opinion neither #spectator nor #multi fill the void of a private chatroom. not to mention that #spectator is a chat that literally anyone can jump in to.
Bobbias
I also spend most of my time playing solo. If I could still play solo and stay in #spectator it'd be fine, but sine that doesn't make any sense, I do think we should be able to have some way to chat with small groups.

I'm genuinely curious why you're against this, peppy, because I see no reason to not implement some better way to communicate with a select group of friends. Posting chat logs or manually relaying messages between friends (since some things shouldn't be posted to public rooms) is a HUGE pain. On top of that, if they were player moderated, there would be little potential for any sort of abuse of the system.
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply