Let us use @tags to invite people into conversations

I feel like this would be an extremely useful feature.


I have only ever seen Richard do it so this might be only accessible to him. But most long standing users would have various uses for this.


@Sythe

 

If you're the creator of the conversation you can just invite people in. So wouldn't be needed for that.

I've always wondered what happens when you tag a person in PM's.
Would be nice, but necessary..? I don't really think it would be?

 

So I do @Gohan in a PM and it auto lets him see the convo?

I could use that o.o... Support.

 

How about you just add them on skype? Or discord? Why do you need to make a more complicated On-site feature when you have so many other platforms that can accomplish this far easier. These are the ideas our community teams and their leaders are coming up with and wasting time on? ....

 

I don't like this idea things can get way to spammy

 

This is how it works:

Gyazo - b2ec3f0d3d94177f7b35820eedb793a7.png

Also this allows you to add people after conversation has taken place, This is good for obvious reasons.

Because not everything done is Sythe is through external sites/can be done through external sites.

This already exists, and is not very complicated at all.

You seem to be under the assumption that I specifically neglect my duties as a PR team leader to make suggestion threads in the suggestion forum?

I can obviously do these things concurrently.

 

And it doesn't work for us? (I've never tried)

Nice feature, I guess.

 

Nope I actually tried it today because I had a need for it. But to no avail

 

Anything that can improve in-house messaging is crucially better than using anything off-site, especially for trading purposes, this way a user could invite a staff member into a conversation and immediately prove PMs

 

Yeah, no.

 

Do you need it explaining to you? lol
If we could easily trade through Sythe.Org, everything is proveable, nothing can be faked, if being able to tag a user into a conversation (PM) - such as a staff member - to resolve a dispute or a report, then that would be much better than having to prove a skype screenshot is legitimate.

 

Do you realize that 90% of the community would be turned off by this idea entirely? No matter how much you attempt to stress it, real-time messaging will defeat this.

 

Of course, but its an option - and again this means PMs can instantly be verified too.

This also has other users other than trading.

 

How did you get this metric?

Did you poll all of the community and take their feedback and convert it to a %?

 

If we are at the point where we want to implement these simplistic things that are helpful to the extent of lazy people who cannot take a few pictures for reports or are unsafe during their trades? Not sure what I am missing here; sounds like it's just an unnecessary additive to PM system overall.

These are not the things we need to be worrying about at this time. Not going to sit here and argue over a shit suggestion lol.

No support.

 

I cannot PM, but I assumed more people could be added to a conversation. Seems to be perfect for middlemanning. Would be a cool feature to have just for that alone; it has limited use otherwise.



So this does nothing?

 

If that's ticked, this should show up under conversation participants.



I prefer how it is now.

 

Okay thanks!

That changes things, then. I think that's what Richard used in the case mentioned in OP. I think he added Roary, then tagged him to give a double notification. Also, seems like something that could go wrong by people accidentally adding users into a conversation so it'd have to be opt-in.

Knowing that you CAN invite people into conversations already, then I think this idea is silly.

 

This is if the person who made the conversation ticks that however.

If not then there is no way for me to add people. For example, yesterday I had a pm from a somewhat new member asking for a clarification on a specific rule. I was unable to add somebody to the conversation.


Although good point about being able to add people. I had PM'd Richard at first to ask him and did not have that selected. But obviously he can do whatever he wants on the forum and might have just been able to enable it himself.

 

If the conversation starter did not tick that option, then there is probably a reason for that. I wouldn't want to create a private conversation and have the participant invite whoever they want without my approval.