Timeline for Allow more than one @name notification per comment
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 2, 2020 at 15:53 | history | edited | Drazen Bjelovuk | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 306 characters in body
|
| Jul 22, 2019 at 14:03 | history | edited | Drazen Bjelovuk | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 26 characters in body
|
| Jan 31, 2018 at 20:50 | comment | added | Loduwijk | @DrazenBjelovuk For the second part, yes, but for the first part it says "notify every participant by default". Did you intend for that to be used the same way, so more of a "notify me by default"? I thought you were kind of discussing both at the same time and was trying to do the same myself. If you are talking about only subscribing to a thread to be notified of changes, then this will likely receive more support. If there is not already a feature request for that, I suggest you make one. | |
| Jan 31, 2018 at 19:47 | comment | added | Drazen Bjelovuk | @Aaron Now I think you're misunderstanding the premise. The option would be for users who want to be notified by all comments, not for a user to notify everyone. Use case being for someone who wants to follow the discussion of a particular comment thread. | |
| Jan 31, 2018 at 17:25 | comment | added | Loduwijk | @DrazenBjelovuk Now to discuss the merits of your answer itself: To notify all by default I think is bad, but to have the option to notify all, as you suggested after, could be useful. I think the times when notifying all is necessary is less often than needing to notify 2 or 3 people, but there could be instances where all is better than exactly 1. Your answer could be a separate feature request too, and such a feature would be fine (if not abused), though I highly doubt it would get implemented. If they refuse to let use tag 2 people, they'll refuse all as well. | |
| Jan 31, 2018 at 17:22 | comment | added | Loduwijk | @DrazenBjelovuk And I would not have suggested it either if it weren't for that last comment you made "May 12 '15 at 23:12". That came after most of the other comments, and there was only just 1 negative comment after that. And even that comment seems to be misunderstanding your answer, as Tim could do exactly as he says he wants... just don't check the box. But he doesn't seem to get that, perhaps due to misunderstanding. Of course, I am not them and am only guessing. | |
| Jan 31, 2018 at 12:05 | comment | added | Drazen Bjelovuk | @Aaron Well none of the comments had suggested that misunderstanding until yours, so unfortunate if that's the case. I'd figured that was implicit. You at least made the effort to comprehend and evaluate before knee-jerk downvoting, so cheers to that. | |
| Jan 30, 2018 at 22:33 | comment | added | Loduwijk | @DrazenBjelovuk Part of the issue might be that your answer is misunderstood. Until reading your comments here, I did not realize that it was an option that you intend everyone to have for all threads that applies only to themselves. The "only to themselves" part being the most important. | |
| May 12, 2015 at 23:12 | comment | added | Drazen Bjelovuk |
@Tim That's fine, I'm explaining why your issue is perfectly unfounded. If someone desires to be notified of all comments in a public and open thread, that should be solely up to them and in no way affects you. There's no reason @username couldn't still act as a guarantee that the directed recipient will get the message. Whether or not a third party chooses to be notified as well is completely inconsequential.
|
|
| May 12, 2015 at 20:30 | comment | added | Tim | @Josh sometimes, I'm talking to one person. I don't want to be notifying everyone. I'm not after an argument, I'm just explaining my -1. | |
| May 12, 2015 at 18:35 | history | edited | Drazen Bjelovuk | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 163 characters in body
|
| May 12, 2015 at 18:29 | comment | added | Drazen Bjelovuk | @Tim What do you care if everyone sees your comment? How does others choosing to be notified of an already public posting affect you in any way? That's a ridiculous criticism. As for current comment threads, they'd be disabled by default, or in the case of my alternate suggestion, which you've also seemed to completely overlook, nothing would change. At that point you're literally protesting optionally additional functionality. | |
| May 12, 2015 at 18:13 | comment | added | Tim | -1 But maybe I don't want everyone to see my comment? What would happen to current comment threads? I don't want to have to tick / untick half the time - I often want and often don't want. | |
| May 12, 2015 at 14:06 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | I didn't have to explain in the first place - there are other reasons why I'm against your idea, maybe I'll explain when having some time to think of putting it into proper words. I'm just one person though, for all we know you might get others to support you, so it's really no big deal. | |
| May 12, 2015 at 13:39 | history | edited | Drazen Bjelovuk | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 7 characters in body
|
| May 12, 2015 at 13:01 | comment | added | Drazen Bjelovuk | Then you clearly have. The other way around implies notifications from everyone would be disabled by default (as it is now), while the button/option would be "Enable all notifications from this comment thread". | |
| May 12, 2015 at 12:58 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | I didn't miss it, I have to desire to start ticking checkbox whenever I comment. | |
| May 12, 2015 at 12:49 | comment | added | Drazen Bjelovuk | Did you miss the last sentence or just choose to ignore it? | |
| May 12, 2015 at 12:48 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | No thanks. I don't want to start getting thousands of notifications. | |
| May 12, 2015 at 12:44 | history | answered | Drazen Bjelovuk | CC BY-SA 3.0 |