User Channels

[Lithic]

Would it be possible to have the log on messages for user channels? You know the "Lithic has logged onto <the channel that must not be named>" or something?

And could we get a /command that lists the users in that user channel? like /listchan <channelname> for example?

[Vizzini]

Signed

[Cadaia]

/signed

[branmakmuffin]

It's no big deal to me, but why would you want this feature? Perhaps if people had the ability to join it anonymously.

[Vizzini]

It is anyon, there is no list of who is in the channel and your not required to reply, you could lurk all you want muffin.

It's no big deal to me, but why would you want this feature? Perhaps if people had the ability to join it anonymously.

[branmakmuffin]

It is anyon, there is no list of who is in the channel and your not required to reply, you could lurk all you want muffin.

With the list function which the OP is advocating, there should also be an option to join anonymously.

And trust me, "branmakmuffin" is never in a custom channel.

Where are we going to lunch? Pup 'n' Taco?

[CDG]

/signed

[GlassCannon]

It is anyon, there is no list of who is in the channel and your not required to reply, you could lurk all you want muffin.

And this is the way I like it. No "Hey this guy just started watching the channel too", "This guy logged off" "This guy logged on" garbage cluttering up my already merged chat window(Party, Guild, Tells, Userchat1 all in one window)

[Desteria]

I'd love ot at least have a way to get a list fo whos on it nto sur about the log on off spam btu you know i think i;d even like that to though for other perferable with an option to turn it on and off.

[Hordo]

/signed

[HeavenlyCloud]

/signed

[branmakmuffin]

Has anyone advocating for this articulated a reason why? Right now, you could just post "Who's here?" Those who want you to know and are not currently occupied fending off hordes of ravening beasts will answer.

This is more complicated, but on channel creation, there could be an option to set it as "always anon" (like it is now), "optional anon" (joiner marks whether they're anon on joining) and "open" (anon join not possible, with a warning that joiner will not be anonymous).

[Vizzini]

I was thinking Maybe the Table of Round.

With the list function which the OP is advocating, there should also be an option to join anonymously.

And trust me, "branmakmuffin" is never in a custom channel.

Where are we going to lunch? Pup 'n' Taco?

[branmakmuffin]

I was thinking Maybe the Table of Round.

That doesn't say "Southern California" the way Pup 'n' Taco does.

[Kistilan]

Has anyone advocating for this articulated a reason why? Right now, you could just post "Who's here?" Those who want you to know and are not currently occupied fending off hordes of ravening beasts will answer.

This is more complicated, but on channel creation, there could be an option to set it as "always anon" (like it is now), "optional anon" (joiner marks whether they're anon on joining) and "open" (anon join not possible, with a warning that joiner will not be anonymous).

Always Anon is the WHO IS List Feature, which makes sense.

If you have been given a password to join a channel, your friends want to know when you join.

If you're on a Server-Wide Channel (See Argonnessen's HELP Channel), sometimes it's good to know who has logged on so you don't say the WRONG thing because you already have got a butt-hurt thing going on that hasn't gone to the final /squelch, but if you don't know who is listening to you chat you might actually make a social mistake and apologize all you want, some people won't forgive you for what you said in ear shot.

So, I'm all for a WHO JOINED CHANNEL function to display (at user toggle, as with everything else in chat windows) so you can keep track of who you're talking to in specific channels.

/signed

[Aspenor]

/channel list

/signed

[branmakmuffin]

Always Anon is the WHO IS List Feature, which makes sense.

If you have been given a password to join a channel, your friends want to know when you join.

If you're on a Server-Wide Channel (See Argonnessen's HELP Channel), sometimes it's good to know who has logged on so you don't say the WRONG thing because you already have got a butt-hurt thing going on that hasn't gone to the final /squelch, but if you don't know who is listening to you chat you might actually make a social mistake and apologize all you want, some people won't forgive you for what you said in ear shot.

So, I'm all for a WHO JOINED CHANNEL function to display (at user toggle, as with everything else in chat windows) so you can keep track of who you're talking to in specific channels.

I can tell from the title of your post that you don't quite get what I'm driving at.

If there were a function to list who's in a channel, then joiners should have the option to disable revealing their presence. This has nothing to do with the anon checkbox on the Who list, unless you're saying that being anon in the game would also make you anon in user channels (assuming Turbine implemented this list feature).

If someone can't stop themselves from saying bad things about people on open and quasi-open chat channels in the game, they need a spanking.

[Borror0]

Why sjhould there be a need to join a channel as anon? Curious.

[branmakmuffin]

Why sjhould there be a need to join a channel as anon? Curious.

Why should everyone's presence be revealed? I don't think much of Kistilan's answer (although when he wrote "at user toggle," that sounded like he agrees with leaving it up to the joiner as to whether his presence can be revealed), because it almost sounds like it boils down to "I need to know who's on so I can tailor my gossip appropriately."

[Vizzini]

I think the point is, that you don't have to join the channel if you don't want to. No one is forcing you to do so, it's just being stated that for the small population of the people that will use the user channels, we would like the ability to know who we are talking to instead of just the number of people int he channel.

and I don't get the Pup's N' Taco's Reference. Maybe you can elaborate.