Posts: 3,407
Threads: 68
Likes Received: 2,149 in 1,073 posts
Likes Given: 1,191
Joined: Aug 2014
Country:
11-01-2018, 05:21 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-01-2022, 01:07 AM by Fearless Community. Edited 2 times in total.
Edit Reason: Fixed Encoding
)
Title of suggestion:
Remove/alter the way voice channels work
Description:
There's multiple options to consider here:
- The discord bot could be coded so that it can create a temporary voice channel for you, removing itself once everyone has left it.
- Simply remove all user & staff created personal voice channels and stick to public voice channels.
- The server provides us with a certain amount of public voice channels, onto which you can temporarily claim ownership over the channel.
Thus being able to lock/unlock the channel, etc.. Basically giving you full ownership until you leave it.
Why:
Because as it stands now, voice channels are only very rarely being used.
Posts: 6,533
Threads: 272
Likes Received: 5,861 in 1,965 posts
Likes Given: 2,806
Joined: Aug 2015
Reputation:
209
Country:
11-01-2018, 05:25 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-01-2022, 01:07 AM by Fearless Community.
Edit Reason: Checked Encoding
)
Just for the record I cannot guarantee I can get temporary channels working.
Posts: 3,546
Threads: 312
Likes Received: 1,617 in 844 posts
Likes Given: 1,734
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation:
76
Country:
11-01-2018, 05:26 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-01-2022, 01:07 AM by Fearless Community.
Edit Reason: Checked Encoding
)
+support for option one, if it's possible to code something like that.
From what I've seen from doing channel purges, most channels get removed and only about half or 1/3 of channels that people wish to keep are actually used often, so there are a lot of channels that aren't being used. Also, people request channels that they abandon after a while or never actually use. It's hard to keep track of this as well, as there are no channel logs to check if a certain channel has been used or not.
Posts: 1,470
Threads: 117
Likes Received: 921 in 561 posts
Likes Given: 1,800
Joined: Apr 2017
Reputation:
27
Country:
11-01-2018, 05:28 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-01-2022, 01:07 AM by Fearless Community.
Edit Reason: Checked Encoding
)
+support
Posts: 3,407
Threads: 68
Likes Received: 2,149 in 1,073 posts
Likes Given: 1,191
Joined: Aug 2014
Country:
11-01-2018, 05:30 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-01-2022, 01:07 AM by Fearless Community. Edited 2 times in total.
Edit Reason: Checked Encoding
)
(11-01-2018, 05:26 PM)TheSiphon Wrote: +support for option one, if it's possible to code something like that.
From what I've seen from doing channel purges, most channels get removed and only about half or 1/3 of channels that people wish to keep are actually used often, so there are a lot of channels that aren't being used. Also, people request channels that they abandon after a while or never actually use. It's hard to keep track of this as well, as there are no channel logs to check if a certain channel has been used or not.
It's been my personal experience the [Keep] system isn't as effective as it should be, this was already the case back in 2016 when I tried this method, this all due to the nature of people wanting to keep their channels regardless of whether or not they actually use it.
I don't see that changing anytime soon or ever for that matter.
Something needs to be done about it regardless.
Posts: 1,304
Threads: 41
Likes Received: 1,040 in 483 posts
Likes Given: 831
Joined: Apr 2016
Reputation:
38
Country:
11-01-2018, 05:39 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-01-2022, 01:07 AM by Fearless Community.
Edit Reason: Checked Encoding
)
-support why is it a problem, there is no harm in keeping them
Posts: 5,103
Threads: 237
Likes Received: 3,608 in 1,515 posts
Likes Given: 2,992
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation:
69
Country:
11-01-2018, 05:45 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-01-2022, 01:07 AM by Fearless Community.
Edit Reason: Checked Encoding
)
+support
Pollux
Fearless Management
__________________________________________________________________
Posts: 3,407
Threads: 68
Likes Received: 2,149 in 1,073 posts
Likes Given: 1,191
Joined: Aug 2014
Country:
11-01-2018, 10:53 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-01-2022, 01:07 AM by Fearless Community.
Edit Reason: Checked Encoding
)
(11-01-2018, 05:39 PM)Coffee Wrote: -support why is it a problem, there is no harm in keeping them
That's just a lazy attitude.
There's no harm in alot of things, thus you shouldn't try to improve upon them?
I hope you realise that's exactly what you're saying.
Posts: 660
Threads: 46
Likes Received: 217 in 156 posts
Likes Given: 129
Joined: Apr 2013
Country:
11-02-2018, 12:39 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-01-2022, 01:07 AM by Fearless Community. Edited 1 time in total.
Edit Reason: Checked Encoding
)
+support would be a great feature if this was added, it kinda cleans up discord as well for option 1
Posts: 786
Threads: 77
Likes Received: 399 in 261 posts
Likes Given: 429
Joined: Mar 2018
Country:
11-02-2018, 10:06 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-01-2022, 01:07 AM by Fearless Community.
Edit Reason: Fixed Encoding
)
Neutral, I think the customisablilty is cool with the current custom channels and that’s what I think most people like about them! So unless with the bot it makes the channel and you then have full permissions over it then I will lean more towards a + but I’m currently still neutral. The channels that are there and then when someone joins and it becomes their own would be quite hard imo due to having to make the bot look at the channels 24/7 waiting for someone to leave and join is quite frankly pointless.
If anything happens I think it would most likely be the commanded temp channels with full perms over it.
|