I tried mentioning 2 users in a comment on my question, but I got the message:

Only one additional @user can be notified; the post owner will always be notified

I am the owner, and I was only trying to ping one additional @user. This message is misleading as we can only notify one @user (with a default owner notification).

Shouldn't the text be:

Only one @user can be notified per comment. The post owner will always be notified.

when I'm pinging two people in the thread who are not the owners?

  • @Nick Isn't it a bug that the message shown is the wrong one? Jun 27, 2013 at 10:58
  • @Manishearth The message is still true, its a "You've misunderstood how the comment rules work, heres a summary of how they work" message Jun 27, 2013 at 11:14
  • @RichardTingle Not exactly. "only one additional" -- that implies that the maximum is two. The post owner bit is irrelevant. Jun 27, 2013 at 11:16
  • The correct message is Only one @user can be notified per comment, iirc Jun 27, 2013 at 11:16
  • 1
    @Manishearth there is some sense in starting feature request asking to change the text of the message when it's a comment posted by the OP however it better be done in a brand new question here, this one just ask for support to clarify the issue. Can't see reason to reopen. Jun 27, 2013 at 11:23
  • @ShaWizDowArd It was a bug, which probably needed better wording. It was misinterpreted and edited to fir those misinterpretations. I'll edit it back Jun 27, 2013 at 11:24

1 Answer 1


It's a standard message, you can have one and only one @username in your comment.

I.e. you can only specify one person who will receive a notification about your comment, this is .

As a bonus, the post owner will also be replied to; if you're the post owner you obviously won't be included in the reply.

  • What is status-bydesign - the misleadingness being raised against the error message, or the underlying, seemingly arbitrary restriction? The query is about the former. I came here seeking something about the latter. But either way, saying this is meaningless unless you can point us to the rationale behind the design.
    – Stewart
    Nov 15, 2023 at 10:57
  • @Stewart both I guess. The message and the policy are both by design. Note that this is a bug report. Sounds like you want to raise a feature request. (Having endless variety in a message has a cost in more testing and/or bugs; it's better to have one message thats always true than for the message to fiddle about trying to omit true but not currently relevant information) Nov 15, 2023 at 23:04
  • Just one or two error messages isn't "endless variety". Still, maybe what you say is MS's excuse for many .NET exception messages being so vague? It's only right to consider the pros and cons of more versus fewer possible error messages.
    – Stewart
    Nov 18, 2023 at 13:07

You must log in to answer this question.

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