Timeline for Provide a way to determine which user is spamming stars in chat
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
41 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 18, 2021 at 11:34 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://chat.stackexchange.com with https://chat.stackexchange.com
|
|
| Jul 11, 2017 at 19:15 | comment | added | Poke | The solution is simple. We just need to allow users to flag stars that they find abusive or star stars that they agree with and want to promote... | |
| S Jul 7, 2017 at 9:38 | history | bounty ended | CommunityBot | ||
| S Jul 7, 2017 at 9:38 | history | notice removed | CommunityBot | ||
| Jul 2, 2017 at 16:51 | comment | added | trichoplax is on Codidact now | Since info on who starred is no longer leaked to all users the comment about using WebSocket no longer applies. | |
| Jun 30, 2017 at 20:09 | answer | added | trichoplax is on Codidact now | timeline score: 35 | |
| Jun 29, 2017 at 7:55 | history | edited | Shadow Wizard |
edited tags
|
|
| S Jun 29, 2017 at 7:55 | history | bounty started | Shadow Wizard | ||
| S Jun 29, 2017 at 7:55 | history | notice added | Shadow Wizard | Authoritative reference needed | |
| S May 22, 2017 at 8:17 | history | bounty ended | CommunityBot | ||
| S May 22, 2017 at 8:17 | history | notice removed | CommunityBot | ||
| S May 14, 2017 at 6:48 | history | bounty started | CommunityBot | ||
| S May 14, 2017 at 6:48 | history | notice added | user307833 | Draw attention | |
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:31 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 24, 2014 at 14:02 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Migration of MSO links to MSE links
|
|
| Apr 24, 2014 at 14:01 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Migration of MSO links to MSE links
|
|
| Mar 19, 2014 at 16:04 | comment | added | Tim Stone | @Bart Hrm, yeah...Also interesting is the comment there saying that ids are leaked in the WebSocket message. If that's the case then I can get the information I need regardless, I just didn't think that happened for stars. | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 16:01 | comment | added | badp | @FEichinger Citation needed; just because sexual and unintentional innuendo gets starred, it hardly makes for a majority of the sidebar and it's still more interesting/funny/varied content then seeing "Good morning, Bridge" there every single day. | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:53 | history | edited | Tim Stone | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 356 characters in body
|
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:48 | comment | added | Unionhawk | @fredley He was debating the star function as a "useful" feature of chat, when in most rooms, I will agree, it serves basically no practical purpose. | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:47 | comment | added | Bart | Rather surprising to see the response here when this recently didn't get much of a warm welcome ... But at least this seems to answer my comment. | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:45 | comment | added | user98085 | @fredley Yes, clearing stars on messages that multiple people have starred pisses me off. Doesn't change that stars aren't exactly use-/helpful the way they're commonly used across the main rooms. | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:43 | comment | added | fredley | @FEichinger ahem | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:41 | comment | added | user206222 | @FEi The Bridge may not use it effectively, but RPG.SE (at the very least) uses stars seriously. | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:38 | comment | added | fredley | @Emracool Derail implies the conversation was on rails to begin with I guess. | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:38 | comment | added | user241462 | @GnomeSlice I didn't do it either | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:37 | comment | added | user206222 | @Robert Derail may not be the right word, but it certainly ruins a helpful feature | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:37 | comment | added | Buns Glazing | I didn't do it. | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:36 | comment | added | fredley | To be fair, I think almost everything that happens in the Bridge is an attempt to derail what is happening in the Bridge. | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:36 | comment | added | user102937 | We have normal? | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:36 | comment | added | Elva | We have normal in The Bridge? | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:35 | comment | added | Jason Berkan | We have normal business in The Bridge? | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:33 | comment | added | user102937 | [Goes to the bridge to star every message, just to see what happens] | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:32 | comment | added | Unionhawk | @RobertHarvey Someone starring every message in The Bridge (not just most messages, all of them) led to around 30 minutes of talking about stars. I don't know if that's necessarily a derailment from normal business in The Bridge, but it's pretty disruptive either way. | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:31 | comment | added | Tim Stone | @RobertHarvey Derail is probably an exaggeration, but it doesn't seem productive to willingly allow people to behave like that. | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:31 | answer | added | fredley | timeline score: 21 | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:30 | comment | added | user102937 | @fredley: Your chatroom is being derailed because my God, it's full of stars? Please. | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:29 | comment | added | fredley | Please can we have this. It is possible for one user to completely derail a chat room using this method. | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:29 | comment | added | Richard Tingle | Rather than an auto flag why not just set a hard limit, like for voting and possibly a rate limit | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:29 | comment | added | Zelda | Would love this, head(s) need to roll | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:27 | history | asked | Tim Stone | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
