Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

Today, I did this:

enter image description here

I changed the room to gallery mode and removed myself as owner, essentially eliminating the ability for anyone to talk in the room.

I propose that the last owner of a chat room should not be able to be removed, ensuring that there is always at least one owner.

share|improve this question
Some people have waaaaaaaaayyy too much time on their hands... – Mat Nov 7 '12 at 18:48

I feel like the proper response to this is "don't do that." Don't moderators still have access to it anyways? If someone really wanted to be in the room and there's no owner, I say it's fair game to whoever wants to claim it on Meta.

share|improve this answer
"Doctor, My finger hurts when I touch it like this." "Then don't touch it like that." – Kyle Trauberman Nov 7 '12 at 18:51
Moderators are global owners of every chat room, so they could readd another owner in any case. – Mad Scientist Nov 7 '12 at 18:56
@MadScientist Moderators are not global owners... They just happen to have privileges that are a superset of owners' privileges. – Lorem Ipsum Nov 7 '12 at 21:02

If mods are global owners, then I suggest a confirmation like "you are the last owner for this room, are you sure you want to leave the room?" or something along those lines should suffice

share|improve this answer
I would rather say "you are the only owner of the room." A warning should be sufficient. – kiamlaluno Nov 7 '12 at 19:54

Another solution could be to just eliminate the ability for people to remove themselves as owner.

share|improve this answer
I could create a room, and pass its ownership to somebody else; that is perfectly acceptable. The problem is with rooms without any owner. A warning that explains what it is happening should suffice. ("You cannot add yourself back as owner of the room." or "This actions is irreversible." should make anybody careful of what s/he is doing.) – kiamlaluno Nov 7 '12 at 19:57

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .