|
|
|
[
Permlink
| « Hide
]
Honey Fairweather added a comment - 22/Mar/07 03:59 PM
Linked as requested by Torley Linden.
If you supress group IM's why should you even bother to remain in the group? Tagging rights in your profile?
As it stands closing the IM window will stop all further IMs coming in for a period of time. I would rather see the "xxx xxx has closed this session..." message supressed or only displayed if the group IM window is open, not to by itself create a new group IM window or ever display in the normal text area. This brings up the idea that rather than supress group IM that there was an option to not merge group IM with chat instead. I would so like to keep some high traffic groups out of my chat and in their own window until I was ready to read it. Group chat is definitely not the only reason to be in a group! Groups offer a wealth of permissions/rights that cannot be accessed any other way. They help your members avoid autoreturn when building on your land and let them set a home on your land. This option would also allow people to join a communication-based group just for the group notices.
You can suppress group IMs reaching your chat by turning off the "IM in chat" option. While I think this is an important feature to add, the group IM does have it's uses.
I think this should have to be anabled by the group owner. In the roles menu "Allow this role to silence group IMs" So that people don't just mute it automatically and miss out on important communication. Thanks for the comments -
Jayden: as Lex said, groups do a whole lot more than allow group IMs. In my example: people join Fashion Consolidated to receive many notices per week from 200 designers on their new releases. Lex pointed out land uses etc too. WarKirby: yep indeed, I contemplated yet another enhancement request for groups on top of my 9 already (MISC-64 to MISC-72) to allow a group owner to "push" through an important IM or notice even when members had suppressed one or the other. I still might, but this one would have to be implemeted before that anyway. You may however find https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/MISC-65 This is definately a function we need to see in groups in the future.. Eventhough my ONLY rule for my 700+ member group is to NOT use group IM for chat, there always will be people using it for just that.. You can warn them, and they might not do it again.. But with medium and large groups like mine there will always be new members abusing group IM..
I have had a LOT of members leave my group because someone HAD to use it for small chat again, or maybe misclicked in the IM window and put the message out in the wrong group.. On top of that I Myself have left more than 1 group because of JUST that... This is an option that should be implemented in group functionality VERY soon... This is one of my biggest gripes in SL.
There are times when I am not busy or when I am working alone in SL when I like nothing better than to tune in to and take part in Group discussions on my favorite topics. Howevre there are other times when I am in a social situation with others in SL when Group discussion is an intrusion I could do without. Because I connot mute the group (until I am free to listen) I have been forced to Leave a number of groups, that I really want to be involved with, to stop the group IM spamming me at inconvenient times. It is usually done in desperation during a hectic Group discussion making the situation worse by issuing "has left group" messages from everyone trying to stop the spam. This change would enable me to praticipate when I want and I would also know that when I participate I am not spamming others so I would feel more included to join in a discussion. AN EXTRA THOUGHT - It would also be nice if the "include IM in chat" option could be selected by individual IM window rather than a global setting. If the person in the room with me IMs a private comment I want see it in the chat immediately, but people or groups not there I would rather keep their stuff just in the IM window. and deal with as and when I have time. Yes sir, yes sir, three bags full. Please do fix this.
Imagine a quiet moment, an intimate moment, a meditational moment, a moment of intense concentration, when suddenly, ding, your screen is flooded with the clamor of thousands. Bob's comment above sums up my frustration perfectly. Also, his "AN EXTRA THOUGHT" is excellent. Dear Honey,
Many many thanks for setting up these group related issues. And you have hit the nail on the head with this one. In my group, Bisexuals in Second Life, the group chat is an important part of the group experience. The group chat is a support group, a social gathering place and a place to build friendships. But chat, from a large group, is also a great burden, and I have had good people leave because of it. If it ever becomes constant, I expect I would lose many. Having the option to turn the group IM on and off would be a real lifesaver for all of us. Props! --Brenda Archer What could make this even better is if iyou could manage this option in the group list, much like you can go though your friends list to set online status and such for certain people. That way you could easily see and change which groups you were currently listening for rather than having to go into a group's profile to check them individually.
I suppose that could be considered a different feature though, and could be used for multiple features. But it wouldn't be very useful until there were some group options for the average group member. I've been given permission to add this - just one of the many people leaving groups specifically because of this problem:
[20:06] Grazia Horwitz: hey honey... is there ANY way to turn off group chgat without having to leave the group.... sl is so annoying.. and the "left this session"messages make it even worse..... It would be really helpful to know if there's an upper limit on timescale planned to implement this - how far back in the queue is it? We're losing lots of people. This would be fantastic to have. Toggling group IMs for all groups isn't good enough. It would be great to do this selectively. Has my vote.
Yes, this would be neat to temporarily turn off incoming Group IMs when you are busy. Especially until the x has left session messages stop, and the 1.15 Groups bork has been fixed.
But a useful feature nontheless. I can think of nothing that would be urgent that a Group IM would address when otherwise engaged, anything truly important would be sent by personal IM. And to Jayden Beresford, I think we're talking temporary switching off here, but even so, group membership may be required eg renting a house or shop, but you don't need to hear chat or someone asking for their TV to be deeded lol. And of course not all groups are open enrollment so you can't get back in if you leave. Perhaps if Group Owner and/or Officr mesages were stored until not busy would be great so you don't miss an important announcement, but I can live without the rest. What I would prefer is the option that ONLY officers and owners have the right to START a group IM session. This way, group IM content is always relevant. Make it one of the group powers.
I don't want to hear people asking for TP's bc they are too lazy to search, or asking questions about things that only the owner would know, or commenting zOMG, that is so cute!!!! on a new release that was put out in notices, or being so rude as to promote someone else's shop/services, or just saying 'hi' for no reason. This is something I've and many others have wanted for a while. Here's how I'd like to see it implemented:
Individuals have the option to not receive group IMs. Important notices should be a notice not an IM since only those online at the time will ever see the IM and users can already supress group Notices so its not a valid argument against having the ability to supress group IMs. Owners when creating the group can choose to disable IMs in various levels:
Better control over group IMs has definitely been wanted to ages; we'd like to see this feature too, generally speaking – exact implementation is yet to be determined, but that's what comments here are for to help with.
Hello WorkingOnIt,
One suggestion I'd like to make is that the group IM suppression be group-by-group. This is because the same person might be in a small family group where IMs need to be always on, and also in a large interest group where they can stay off while one is working or otherwise preoccupied. It is true that some percentage of people would just turn off group IM forever for certain groups, but to me at least, that is not as bad as having them feel they have to leave the group completely. An owner/officer option to force IM to be on, when initiating a session, would permit making important announcements, and if someone abuses this they deserve to lose the group members. Just some speculations. Many thanks! Alright. my suggestion on how this should work. something I think everyone can agree on.
Firstly6, on the side of the group owner/officer. Three new options in the role abilites -Allow this role to send group IMs If a role is not allowed to send group IMs. when they try to type in the group IM box, their message would be discarded by the system(and seen by noone), and they would recieve an automated message from second life "Error: Message failed. You do not have permission to send IMs to this group" If a role is allowed to send IMs, the ability to recieve IMs would be forced on too. So as to prevent people typing aimlessly and seeing nothing, while spamming other roles in the group. If ability to recieve IMs is disabled, likewise, ability to send them would be forcibly disabled too. When not allowed to recieve IMs, that role would somply become oblivious to all IM conversatiohns in the group. Their I window would NEVER be opened by that group. In group info, on the user end. Somewhere near the choose your title menu, there would be a little tick box. This would be to prevent muting of chat in groups which are designed for it. The simple logic being, if a user does not want to recieve IMs, from a group whose purpose is conversation and chat, they should simply leave the group. Of course, the purpose of the group is to be decided by the owner. If permission to recieve IMs is removed from this rle, the option to allow muting, wqould be deselected too. But the user mute settings should stuick. SO that if someone has muted chat from a group, and permission to recieve IMs is revoked, then later reinstated, they would still not recieve IMs. If permission to send or recieve IMs is revoked while a user in that role is currently in a chat session, they would be ejected from the session and given the following error message "You have been ejected from this group IM session. Your permission to participate in IMs to this group has been revoked." Note that it SHOULD be possible to set a role to be able to recieve IMs, but not to send them.. This would allow group administrators to use it as a one way communication tool. In such situations where a group notice is not appropriate. One example I can think of would be a commander of a force engaged in a battle. The group IM could be used to communicate orders to the troops, where a group notice would not be useful as it is slower, and would be unnecessarily shown to offline members. And where allowing the troops to talk back could lead to confusion. If you're pacifist, replace the above with a manager, a team, and a competetive game. Wow, this is a looong comment. Anyways, I'm fairly sure I've covered all the bases here. Pretty much every possible situation that could arise. Needless to say, I'm including the ability to prevent sending IMs, and the ability to mute them, in a single plan, even though they are seprate proposals. I think they would work best in tandem. WorkingOnIt Linden, you want exact implementation, here it is ^^ Thanks for linking this one, and yes, very important. While a server-side solution would be great, we don't even have a client-side option in the interim! It gets very annoying. I mentioned this (but didn't realise an issue was posted) when I produced SVC-280 (only track required groups, allowing you to join far more).
Is it just me, or have Group IMs actually got a bit worse since the 1.17 update?
As a new Lucky Chair owner, I joined a couple of the busy Lucky Chair groups to find out more about them. With 1.16, I could turn off the Group IMs by closing the Group IM tab a couple of times (it didn't usually work the first time but seemed to work 2nd or 3rd try). Last night I did the same thing - closed the Group IM tabs - but kept getting the IM messages coming up on-screen mixed in with Chat. I made sure I had the Preference not to get Group IM showing in Chat History checked; still got the messages. It got so difficult to 'see' what I was doing (I have a laptop with a small screen) that I ended up leaving the groups just to stop the chat. So it seems some parts of Group IM functionality may be better with the upgrade, but (unless I have missed a preference or setting somewhere) others have got worse P.S. I use a Mac iBook with OSX 10.x A temporary solution is to tear-off & minimize the particular IM session you want to mute. Because of being able to do that, I don't see this as a critical issue. It is a convenience.
Changed the summary to be more general, because we may not implement it exactly how it was suggested before, but the intent is clearly stated in Honey's original description. Definitely a hot, longtime issue, and linking it to an older internal issue we have too.
I also support the notion of IM rights being determined by Group roles, so that, for example. only owners or officers can send Group IMs or open a Group IM session. (I was under the vague impression that was already the case . . . imagine my surprise to find out that it isn't!)
I concur! There are groups I have left due to the inconvenience of group im's. I'd like some flexibility here.
I like the idea that only group officers can send im's since there are some groups in which the only time the im is supposed to be used is when an annoucement/notice is being made. I'd like to add that I'd like to be able to choose to only receive im's from group officers. In which case I am thinking that would mean generally I'd like to not receive group im's from avi's with the "everyone" title. As well as, a ticker so that we can mute group im's for a period of time. An example of when it would be helpful is while taking classes in world. Often residents open the chat history to follow along with the teacher, this would be a convenient time to mute group im's, while still allowing individual im's as a student may be receiving assistance from the teacher. When the class is over the ticker could be... un-ticked. I've created a Meta-Issue for all group IM/chat issues. I figure that someone will see them all grouped together and work on them all.
 MISC-387 is the Meta-Issue number. Whoops sorry that meta-issue link is for all group DIALOG issues. there's another meta-issue for group IM/Chat issues. That's
Any one mention white-list before? It will be handy. It will mute the rest of the IMs.
Certain roles can be predefined in the white list drop down list. Cannot wait to see Group IM control been improved. Personally id like to see some kind of temporary muting. EG a way of shutting up a groups chat but without a checkbox (which would effectively be permanent until the check was removed, or client relogged in).
Perhaps it could take the form of a mute button (which changes to unmute until the time has elapsed) on the chat window itself, coupled with a setting (in settings) or a dropdown on the chatbox itself, to choose the duration of the mute. That way there can be a range of mute selection times, eg; permanent (although this one is probably best put on the group page itself) hth I ABSOLUTELY NEED THIS GROUP IM MUTE FOR MY GROUPS.
My group Krystal Epic 1 has over 8000 people. I end up constantly telling people to not use the group IM but with group notice not working and not going to emails, I can't even sent a message to everyone to not use the group IM. All I want is the ability to send group notice properly and mute group IMs. Whatever the fix is, please make sure they work for groups of the tens of thousands. one option
1) FRIENDS LIST so, the USERTOBEMUTED can continue in our FRIENDLIST but your INVITEs and CONFERENCES WILLBE MUTED HE can only talk in normal CHAT and if he continue, we can MUTE IT forever in MUTE LIST so, we have one NEW WINDOWS showing the groups of USERTOBEMUTED and we can mark it. In SL CLIENT the user can define how many minutes the MUTE will be. or, 0 (ZERO) forever Add new role abilities: "can send to group IM" "can receive group IM". Also give each user a checkbox: "Receive group IMs", similar to "Receive Group Notices" that is already there.
JZZ I've left two groups because of the incessant "X has left" bug – yes I consider this a bug and not a feature.
What I'd like to see is a way to selectively mute group chat from any given group. I might want to mute a particularly chatty group for awhile, but still receive group IMs from another group. I do not want a group owner to be able to prevent me from doing this, as has been suggested. Instead, as also suggested, let a group owner push an important announcement through, but only the announcement is received if you've muted that group – not the replies to it. Amanda, the point is to stop the spam to begin with. The point of the suggestion is to enable group IMs to function in a "notice only" mode, where only IMs can come down from the owners/officers, not the newest NPIOF plugging a sale in their store. And if they would fix the session closing bug, you would have the mute right there.
I agree with Amanda Ascot. I have left groups because of the constant 'chatter' that had nothing to do with the group.
A check box for "Recieve group IMs" would be good, as most group owners send out messages via group notices when they want to announce a special event. To further Honey's argumen, I left her group to get away from the IM spam. Her group benefits multiple communities and adds value, but the spam was unmanagable for me even with her excellent and fastidious moderation skills. I would rejoin in a second if I could take control over the IMs.
The issue needs two features: 1. The owner needs to be able to set permission in the role for chat, There are multiple groups I would still be a part of if this had already been implemented. I have left one group because of this. I haven't been in SL a whole month and I already find chat spam a big PIA.
I can't see a reason not to have these options. Any group member can opt out of group notices which usually come once a day and then only if your in world do you get interrupted with it. People using group IM happens all the time and it is most disruptive to anything else. Please add this option. Group chat, from a large and active group, can be HIGHLY distracting when you're trying to concentrate on something else. PLEASE implement this feature!
As for those who say I'll miss an important communication...that's what Notices are for. I'm not sure if this when this was added, but THERE IS AN OPTION TU MUTE GROUP CHAT: when in group chat window, you can press "<<" button and mute text or voice (or both).
It does not stick through logons - which is fine. Having the same option in group info dialog which DOES stick would be fine I suppose - separate for both users and owners. However, it would be GREAT if I had on option to mute chatter for ALL groups at the same time in the Communicate / Groups dialog. When I'm busy, I don't really want to go through all groups and mute them individually. This should not be sticky through logons as well. you mean now besides the option to mute individual people on group chats you can now also mute a whole group at once?
SL allows anyone to mute me without me even knowing - where do they come off telling me I can't mute an anonymous group, without THEM knowing?
All my groups I have for permissions only, I am not a member of any social group. I do want to see the ability to absolutely and permanently mute the n00b chatter from these groups! Not by permission, but under my sole control. This is easy to do client-side, and should be persistent, since I never want to receive group chat from 23 of my 25 groups... Notices are for important stuff, group chat is spam, pure and simple. Bring on the mute function for groups! After being spammed for 2 days by a group I had recently joined, I left it with the chat going something along these lines after a couple of minutes of personal chat among friends about non-group matters
Me: Looks like another group I have to leave because of Group IM spam Actually she was chatting to about 3 friends, the other 446 group members were unwilling participants in the conversation. Hello, Lindens???
I love that SL is available to me...but why does it take so long for some response on this obviously very annoying lack of functionality? Like many others, this is my number one annoyance in SL – I want to be part of some groups, but don't always need or want to hear the everyday chatter (and have to disengage from what I'm doing to close the box). We simply want to be able to **toggle a mute function for group IM's**. I'd like to know what exactly is the hold-up on addressing this seemingly no-brainer issue. Please comment now! If it is a technical difficulty, please do tell, and people will be understanding. It is the lack of communication regarding what appears to be a simple fix that will allow more choice, more freedom, that drives SL Residents nuts about LL. Please address this one way or another. For every vote on this issue, there are a hundred people who feel the same way. Thanks. Well I spoke with one of the lindens awhile ago, and I know it's on thier internal JIRA. So lets keep comments constructive shall we? Maybe examples of use?
It seems to me that Groups in SL are treated very similarly to Listmail in everyday life - right down to the minor flame wars over what is and isn't SPAM or On Topic messages. Listmail solved many of those problems by having Announce Only subscriptions and built-in aliases for reaching only the Administrators. These problems are currently solved in SL by creating multiple groups, one for Chat, one for Announcements Only (where the admins must then monitor everyone's behavior because they can't actually prevent folks from breaking the rule), and when necessary, one for those of status within the community. This is problematic given the hard limit of 25 groups for each account.
Having the option to turn off chat would allow Announce Only memberships, thereby reducing the need for sepparate Chat and Announce groups. This would decrease the number of groups needed within any given community as well as the number of groups any individual needs to communicate desireably with those communities, thereby reducing burden and freeing up slots for other groups without requiring a group max increase, which would increase the burden. Similarly, it would be good if the possibility existed for the group owners to set Announce Only as a blanket setting for the group where there really is no need for a chat channel at all. That is, by default IM is optional for the members, but it can be turned off entirely by the group owners if necessary. There doesn't need to be an option for pushing through that blanket in chat, simply because that's what Group Announcements are already for. I'm sure it's already been mentioned repeatedly (for all I know all of this has been), that the ability to mute groups individually allows one to focus more clearly on the community they are attempting to interact with at the time. This is very helpful for those who attend (or worse, host) events in very different communities. Especially if they have both social and work events to attend. For example, my Mom works for Sun Microsystems and has an SL account for that purpose - but she knows I'm involved with the various High Fantasy communities, which is an interest she shares with me. It would interfere terribly with her work at Sun if she had to listen to elves chattering while she was in a meeting, but it's doesn't remotely solve the problem for her to turn off ALL IM's, because then she cannot hear her co-workers either. - Pyrii, what the hey? People may express their thoughts and frustrations about the lack of this feature in any form they like--this isn't a tech journal, and not all JIRA users are tekkies. Glad you have Lindens on speed dial, but in the absence of any communication from them on this issue in the past half-year, please don't presume to decide what is or isn't an appropriate comment. Let's avoid arrogant condescension, shall we?
"...the ability to mute groups individually allows one to focus more clearly on the community they are attempting to interact with at the time. This is very helpful for those who attend (or worse, host) events in very different communities. Especially if they have both social and work events to attend." This hits the nail on the head. I just want to say I agree with Ember and Viajero. Without being able to mute group IMs, I was forced to create alts for different communities, so that my main, who was hosting in one community, didn't have to get the chat from another while busy interacting with people. But this works out badly for me because it means that the social recognition I have in one community doesn't carry over to the next. I must imagine that if I was trying to do actual business in SL this effect would seem that much worse. Recognition is money in that case.
Of course we can mute people individually if they're spamming, but my take on this issue is that allowing this flag (for both group administrators and locally for group members) is a better solution.
I'd love to hear something from the Lindens about this issue. Any news, thoughts? Is there a particular kind of feedback or ideas they're waiting for from us? My take on this, being the store manager for a place which has a very large group...
Group owners need two basic tag options for created groups: Social Tag - These groups allow group chat & interaction. People joining groups tagged in this manner should expect group chatter... Info Tag - Used by businesses who use groups to allow for info on sales, events or other special promotions or gifts. People joining this sort of group should only expect chatter or contact coming from either the group owner or a designated rep. The first option is a classic group setting while the other allows all the businesses in SL to utilize the aspects of group that allow them to remain in touch with their customer base while not subjecting the entire customer base with a deluge of idle chatter. At the same time, I basically agree with what everyone has said regarding a client-side group chat mute. The main difference in the options I've presented is that this mute function would only be needed on groups tagged as social since contact from a group owner or designated rep should always be pushed through to all members. After all, the members can join groups of their own volition so, if they have no wish to receive info from the group owners, they can always leave group. I guess I see the descimination of info from a group owner as being one of the inherent perks of paying for the creation of a group. The idea of being able to mute groups on an individual basis is VERY appealing & would solve a great deal of the other problematic issues when dealing with groups. Everyone has there own preference on this issue:
I teach in SL and when I am teaching, I need quiet in the class plain and simple. I do not want to unsubscribe and resubscribe to 20 groups Even ONE Global Group Mute/Unmute check box would keep me happy So why not add this function individually to groups as well? I just want to add that making group chat opt-in instead of opt-out is a HORRIBLE HORRIBLE idea. I've talked about the proposed changes to 1.19 with many residents, and the reaction is (quite literally) universal disgust. This is the second most popular feature request on the JIRA. Please, don't screw this up, LL.
By default a new group's EVERYONE role should be able to send chat and then the owner can revoke this particular right if they want the group to not receive IM's from new people who join.
A group ban list would also help to prevent abuse from offenders. This would reduce ARs also. Is there an issue about a group ban list? Group chat is abused by spammers. It is very annoying when you are in a large group and people start spamming it.
In smaller groups the groupchat is funny. In large groups it's an disaster. Large groups suffer from spammers who advertise for everything and from grievers
Everything that will stop this is very welcome THIS IS A MUST IM MUTE FOR GROUPS!!!!!
HOW DO WE GET RIDE OF THESE ANNOYING GROUP IMS I have a large group and I'm also plagued by spammers abusing group IMs.
To make things drastically worse the spammer isnt ejected from the group until they close their group IM window. But I understand that's a separate ongoing bug. I experienced it yesterday. It's now February 2008 and this basic feature has been requested repeatedly for years now. Seriously Linden Labs, what are you doing! We just need a Linden to browse through the feedback. Propose a solution. And we'll comment and vote on it. Alot of the customer proposals are convoluted frankly. We just need something basic and functional that will handle 99% of scenarios to do with this issue. This can be as basic as adding the following to Groups > Roles > Allowed Abilities: ---------------------------------------------------------------- It deserves a "Instant Messages" category of its own because it doesnt really belong anywhere else. It would also make it consistent with the "Notices" category which has a Send and Receive option. The "Instant Messages" category should be placed directly above or below the current "Notices" category because it's all communications related. This is all it would take. Pretty please. Not Mute Entirely, But Priority Levels
------------------------------------------------- I think it might be better to be able to set the priority of the message you send out, so that you can then filter different priority levels. That way REALLY important things can still get through, but people could chat about whatever they want. Most chatter would be general priority and people could set it so they don't see it, but can see other priority levels. You could even add a permission for who is allowed to send high priority things, maybe several priority levels, one of which is a default priority. I would want the owners to be able to send an IM out no matter what level people have their filters set to (like a superpriority level) I'd like to thank everyone who's participated in this JIRA report over the last 9 months since I logged it, and won't add much more to some of the eloquent statements and ideas here than to say that I see some suggestions of group features that I raised in JIRAs at the time of this one that may offer what's asked for here. To see the full list, see the links at the top of MISC-38 which Torley asked me to break out into separate JIRAs, specifically from MISC-64 to MISC-72. Examples: I see someone raising group bans - see MISC-67 - and others who suggest that administrators should still be able to push through important IMs - absolutely - see MISC-65 - and finally some who highlight the need to send IMs to specific roles (e.g. officers only) - see MISC-71. It's be great if people who want these features felt like popping over to those JIRAs too and voting and commenting.
I'm aware that there is a plan to rewrite group functionality substantially in the 1.19 viewer in due course - and that early ideas of simply making groups opt-in rather than opt-out were rightly pointed out as very problematic for community groups who thrive on an interrupt-driven "can you help me?" way of working. My view is that to change group IM to opt-in would be (a) a crude fix for the problem I highlighted here for my very large group and (b) a very hard blow to groups that are driven by open pop-up communication expectations, and could kill many existing groups, even with the rather baroque suggestions of buttons to revert some to opt-out at a user-level. I hope this is being thoroughly re-thought, and I'm still a little baffled why the fix of a "mute Group IMs", completely analogous to opting not to receive group notices (which mostly works) isn't just being implemented as suggested here. It would be great to hear from a Linden here - not sure we have since June 2007, and it's a highly active JIRA. So please do pop Torley and co, even if it's just to transfer some of the thinking on the dev list here and keep your JIRA users informed. Thanks. Agreed... I see this has a LL tracking number, but this JIRA entry is almost a year old now. WorkingOnIt Linden said this has been wanted for ages. I'd love to hear more details on what LL plans to do about this, or why it is getting pushed back if it isn't going to happen promptly. Thanks for any news...
I totally support this issue. Since groups have an ability to limit who may join I do not see why that same security can't be extended to who may post. Every CUSTOMER who drops a group is less likely to shop at that store. Less money spent impacts us ALL.
Less choice in the marketplace-a smaller marketplace. This is very specifically not a duplicate of MISC-65 - I am the Reporter of both JIRAs.
MISC-64: group member controls receipt or not of IMs 1) is to give all users choice, as they have with notices Hope this explains. Honey I left the most groups because i get spam spam spam. Or 100 people who say "HI"
it was very annoying A groupmanager told me they could do nothing about it. The ability to occasionally mute group IMs would add so much to my enjoyment of Second Life. Often I do want to chat in various groups, but some days all the groups seem chatty, or there is a lot of off-topic chat or I am busy taking a class or talking with friends. This functionality would be a god-send.
Many brilliant ideas how to fix this - for now i would be happy if ---
An off switch please! I am a member of Honey's group and even after she has noticed the group about the new rule changes that all members are to refrain from using group im under all circumstances. I have received multiple group im's having nothing to do with the purpose of the group. If I wanted to rent land, attend parties or generally get random spam I'd join groups to get notices about that.
This is a very big issue with all groups. Some people may not be to bothered by it, but when you have most of your 25 groups popping up group im windows while your trying to do a myriad of other things, it can be too much. I can multi-task to a point but when I am busy doing something I do not want disturbances that aren't needed. Please add the mute group im's option! I agree that the spam (advertising) in group chat is a major issue within Second Life. I have left many groups because if it. Before the group chat servers where updated to different servers I would sometimes crash because of all the chat windows popping up. This is a debated topic because everyone has different idea's as to what should be done about it. In one group I was told I was spamming for even talking about it. Personally thats not my idea of spam but regardless security with in the group chat is imperative to a user friendly environment.
I have voted for this Issue but that doesn't exactly mean I want to see a mute option. There are a lot of great ideas within this thread and I agree with most that it is a major SECURITY problem as well as an annoyance. I think Residents dislike spam in group chat more than they dislike crashing... We definately need this, thank you Honey, for bringing this up. Not only that "no chat please" groups are spammed by chat-spammers and that is quite annoying - the "group IM Error" makes it really irritating. Because you cannot just ignore that spammer, you have to click that error message that you can go on with your work.
So like the "Don't receive notices" button in the group-window it would be great to have a "don't receive Chat Messages" or have the option for group owners to set the members a permission if they are allowed to send a chat message (like admins and staff) or not (like regular members). Another Jira: Key: MISC-731 is similar to this one...
I would like to see a feature added to group permissions that you can allow only a few people to use group chat or totally disable it completely. Example: This is needed so bad! We have over 7,000 members and it can be a bad serious problem sometimes.
Ugh I vote yes! So the other day. july 9th. Group chat was lagged bad. 10 minute delay. Users logging into Sl will get 10 minutes laged session in thier IM window. They anser it. And the next guy answered not knowing it was group chat. With over 7,000 memebers and very active group. This set off a chain reaction once again with a bunch of Hi,Hi,Hi,Hi,Hi all day long.. This annoyed several of our long time memebers to the point they left our group. There is no way to stop this once it is going and people do not understand it was a lagged issue and a Problem on Linden Labs side. This caused a loss of about 100 users in one day. This went on for close to 8 hours. And sad to say Us group owners have no way to stop it. It is encouraged to have groups and the larger they are, the more problems can occur.
Please give us these tools so our groups do not get blamed for Linden Labs lag issues and buggy chat I have to wonder, what code, exactly, would go into effecting this change? Would the code needed to mute group IMs really help group chat lag? If so, how would it do this? I guess what I'm wondering is, does the current code keep a list of people to send IMs to that it would add or remove people from, or would it just go through the entire member list and send the IM to whoever had the option enabled (which wouldn't save a ton in time for it). Does anyone happen to know how this would work? How does the current code work, and how would it need to be changed?
A simply option to shut off group chat is what is needed. Some members want to chat in the group chat and others do not. They have the ability to turn off group notices and should be able to do the same with the chat. There are advantages in being in a group besides the social aspect and that should be recognized. This is a priority issues for us with a group of 8000 members. Please, please fix this.
For an unannounced but partial fix (in testing) for spam in groups (although not a direct implementation of the wishes in this JIRA), see comments at the bottom of SVC-2819 - LL please don't close this JIRA on that basis though! That is not an implementation of this request.
While I'm here, a thanks to everyone who continues to voice their concerns on my JIRA here - last time i looked, this was the 2nd highest voted bug on JIRA... a dubious thing to celebrate, but please keep voicing your ongoing need for all associated group fixes! Agreed w/Honey's analysis. This option would still help the ~1500 people in my two groups, allowing us to combine them into one group where some people may choose to mute chat and others don't.
So while I'm thrilled about SVC-2819, this still sounds ideal to me! This issue is way overdue for action. If you joined a group to enjoy the group chat but then can't stop it coming through when you're at an event that needs concentration, its annoying. You always get rows when people in the group make a huge fuss yelling at everyone else to shut up because they're getting married on Second Life. I think it would be quite nice (and have already voted for it eons ago) to have simple mute function at the very least on the chat window that pops for the group chat. You click mute, the window stays there with an unmute option. If you close the window while muted it stays muted for 2hours. If you open the window again you see the unmute button right there you click it again it switches to a mute button and then you are free to participate in group chat.
However it is rather appealing to have chat assigned to an officer and owner role. And to pare it down some, the group menu should have it added in straight way, --> Officers Chat Only If either of these items are selected the appropriate setting is reached, otherwise its a free for all and users still have the clientside ability to mute as needed. Why not emulate the hide group chat IM feature that's part of the Boy Lane Cool Viewer? Very simple and rather than muting the IMs, you still have the option to pull up the history box and check them out.
Agreed with Jayden Beresford.. focus should be put more on separating group chat's from IM's.
I think what is needed is an option to not recieve group chat. Here's an example, I belonged to an update group, the owner likes talking with those in his group, and encourages group chat. I cannot build when my screen is being flooded by senseless chat, so I have no choice but to leave the group, which makes me no longer able to recieve update notices. A point that was brought up in my jira, was that this setting be per-group, and that you could dynamically enable/disable group chat on each group without needing to restart the client.
I left a group of a great community because there were flooding group chats all the time. Maybe others share my experience... Let's hope this will be fixed soon!
I leave groups EVEN GOOD ONES because people just start getting chatty and talk all day at the wrong possible time. I propose a mute button in the group chat window next to "Group info" for easy access which "on/off" toggle functionality. This function would auto reset to on after a log-off so you don't forget you muted the channel. If you desire a more long term mute, then go to the group information window and select the new an appropriate option in there.
Judging from the number of duplicate and related Jiras, the number of votes in support, the frequency with which this topic is raised in group chats, and the number of times I personally have wished for a way to disable a particular group IM when I am busy, I STRONGLY recommend that LL implement something along these lines.
However, seeing that this Jira has been open for more than 2 years, I am not holding my breath until such a much needed and much requested feature is implemented. I have added my vote in support. I've been using the 1.23 client and it includes a feature to hide groups IMs from local chat - seems like a more than adequate fix since I can choose to bring up the group IM window when desired, and see the IMs as opposed to simply having them muted.
that was already possible tons of version ago, the only difference now is they also remove it from that text that shows when you got IM and local chat windows all closed
...the only difference now is they also remove it from that text that shows when you got IM and local chat...
and that only difference makes all the difference as far being a solution for this long standing issue. Previous, the only method to avoid being annoyed by group IMs was to use busy mode. With the change in 1.23, they implemented what was already in mod clients such as Boy Lane and made them unobtrusive. I wasn't aware it was common for people to keep both IMs and local chat windows closed most of the time, I thought this jira entry was about the ding-ding and the IM button popping on the corner of the screen (not to mention the overcrowding of the tab area of the IM window)
btw, they haven't removed the ability to detach the Local Chat window from the IMs window, right? An ability to start a group chat just with certain roles selected to hear it would be nice. So I can inform my officers and security of a problem similataneously, without all the member being worried, or at least organise the panel on the right by role and allow you to select role groups and right click "start conference".
I'm somewhat baffled that this ability doesn't exist. As is, sometimes you want to be in a group for its notices or membership benefits, but not to hear the constant babble of chatter that can often result.
Closing or minimizing the chat windows results in the chat text being shot across the screen anyway, in very large text - the only present solution seems to be to leave any group that can't self-police its use of chat... I own the group for people who use the club on my sim. I have no desire to listen to them telling each other what a fantastic night their having, nor do I want to stop them, but for obvious reasons I don't want to leave the group!
If I could stop IM's for that gorup my experience of SL would be a lot better. Instead I am constantly bombarded with pretty mindless messages. What's the big issue here? It can't be that hard, surely! Please, LL, this is a minor fix which would solve a big (and growing) problem. I am so tired of a hundred idiotic messages popping up on my screen each day, and knowing that's what will happen keeps me from joining no small number of groups.
Please listen us! The problem has only grown ten-fold since this was requested 2.5 years ago!!! (Then again, maybe LL employees either don't join groups and experience the problem, or have an internal fix for only themselves and see no need to extend it to the community.) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
New Feature
Open
Major
Allow group IMs to be muted
