Timeline for Chat multiple usernames feature
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:30 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 23, 2014 at 13:45 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Fixup of bad MSO links to MSE links migration
|
|
| Apr 23, 2014 at 13:38 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Fixup of bad MSO links to MSE links migration
|
|
| Apr 23, 2014 at 9:28 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Migration of MSO links to MSE links
|
|
| Feb 4, 2014 at 17:31 | comment | added | Monica Cellio | I think 2 and 3 would be detrimental. We want to make it easier, not harder, for people to move from just participating on one site to participating more broadly on the network. If the cost of that is that I have one global name as far as chat is concerned, that's fine. We don't need to take away per=site names outside of chat (and shouldn't). | |
| Aug 11, 2011 at 18:21 | comment | added | Shog9 Mod | Hey, there you go! | |
| Aug 11, 2011 at 18:13 | comment | added | GUI Junkie | "Chop GUI" is also good :) | |
| Aug 11, 2011 at 18:04 | comment | added | Shog9 Mod | @GUI: consider, "Gooey Junkie"... | |
| Aug 11, 2011 at 17:59 | vote | accept | GUI Junkie | ||
| Aug 11, 2011 at 17:59 | comment | added | GUI Junkie | I'm also in favor of #2. Thanks for the answer. And about confusion, I thought it was more confusing to use GUI Junkie on a cooking site as this username is 100% IT oriented. | |
| Aug 11, 2011 at 16:11 | comment | added | Lance Roberts | @Shog9, Thanks for the input and the complete answer (in fact I'm going to delete mine now). I always thought we worked on #2, and hope that they implement that at some time. | |
| Aug 11, 2011 at 15:49 | comment | added | Shog9 Mod | @Adam: How is this simple? You want to have two identities simultaneously - there's nothing simple about that. The SE sites do it by maintaining a separate account for each... Y'know what, I've updated my answer. If you think this is worth doing, then post your own answer describing how it would work, what changes would be necessary to the behavior of the existing Chat system to accomplish it, and how having multiple, simultaneous custom names is totally worth it. | |
| Aug 11, 2011 at 15:44 | history | edited | Shog9Mod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Stuff that should have been in the feature request
|
| Aug 11, 2011 at 3:49 | comment | added | Pollyanna | Alternately, force everyone to have the same name on all the sites, and make chat match. I don't see a reason to have the strange middle ground that they've currently chosen to implement. | |
| Aug 11, 2011 at 3:47 | comment | added | Pollyanna | @Shog9 I'm saying that the per-site chat should match the per-site name. That would be less confusing than either the current situation, or the one you seemingly propose where one can have two names per site - one for the site, and one for chat. I'd suggest getting rid of all the clutter and make it simple. If you go to the electronics chat it should match the electronics username, period. Chat, right now, exists largely outside the network in this regard - it should be brought into more close alignment with the sites. | |
| Aug 11, 2011 at 3:07 | comment | added | Shog9 Mod | @Adam: the problem goes beyond names - in order to implement this properly, you'd have to have a separate chat account for every site you have an account on. That would give you parity with the SE behavior. Does that sound less confusing? | |
| Aug 11, 2011 at 3:01 | comment | added | Pollyanna | @Shog9 if Stack Exchange is going to support usernames on a per site basis, is it really unacceptable to ask them to support it on chat? I understand the reasons for this are historical, and it's quite possible they're going to a one user name to rule them all model, but they should choose one or the other. | |
| Aug 11, 2011 at 2:54 | comment | added | Shog9 Mod | @Matthew: didn't say anything about "bad idea"... ;-) | |
| Aug 11, 2011 at 2:53 | comment | added | user154510 | So you're saying that allowing different usernames on different sites only begets confusion and is a bad idea? :P | |
| Aug 11, 2011 at 2:47 | history | answered | Shog9Mod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |