Currently, chat suspension only blocks access to writing, starring and flagging. However, it does not block access to joining and leaving rooms, or to make (visible) modifications to your chat profile.

If the point is to leave the suspended user with read-only access to rooms, we may just as well have redirected them to the transcript.

What I propose is that chat suspensions act more like the kick-mute feature, completely preventing access to the room (even read/join access), and instead prompting the user to read the transcript if they still wish to have some sort of read access.

Currently, the only way to completely get a user off of chat is for a mod to destroy/delete their main user, which is completely unfavorable.

Can we just have something like the following shown to suspended users when they try to enter chat rooms?

You have been suspended automatically|by a moderator and cannot use chat for N minutes. You can still read the transcript to the chatroom [here]

  • 1
    Related: Extend profile hiding in chat for suspended users Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 8:39
  • 7
    I should note that request is probably prompted by multiple users who have continued to troll chatrooms after they were suspended. They'll enter/leave/enter, change their avatars to offensive images, and rename their accounts to troll the room. This isn't a hypothetical scenario, it continues to happen. Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 14:49
  • 1
    @brad I thought 1-rep users did not have their avatar visible and that suspended users had their rep pinned to 1? Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 17:55
  • @JanDvorak - I know for pure <20-rep users this is now blocked: meta.stackexchange.com/a/239291/135615 , but I don't think that applies to suspended users. I swear I saw one of these users popping into a chatroom with a visible avatar. Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 17:58

2 Answers 2


I think you're absolutely right. I've never come across a site that allows banned users to continue to access chat facilities and to change their profile in response to what they're reading.

This is clearly an anomaly and should be treated like a bug and fixed asap.

Frankly I'm not even that fussed about offering them a transcript. They can always read what they've missed as and when they return.

  • 2
    +1, but it's been stated everywhere that transcript should be available to everyone, even visitors who aren't even logged in. Whatever rule violations the suspended user has done, they're not less than a visitor.
    – M.A.R.
    Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 18:51
  • @inɒzɘmɒЯ.A.M - I think it should be actively blocked from them (if such a thing is trivially easy to arrange). I've seen people using the transcript to essentially bypass the ban.
    – Richard
    Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 18:55
  • 1
    Oh? How do they do that?
    – M.A.R.
    Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 18:56
  • @inɒzɘmɒЯ.A.M - Recently, I encountered a user who was using puppet account to bypass a site-ban and basically using these accounts to respond to things being said in the chat they were banned from, all because they'd logged in to chat and opened the transcript.
    – Richard
    Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 18:57
  • 2
    Sock puppet accounts should be reported to mods. Anything a person shouldn't do twice or to themselves (from stepping in important arguments to voting) can be reported, and then the sock puppetry will be investigated and dealt with. I don't see how this relates to the visibility of the transcript though. They can still see it if they're not logged in. That's not bypassing ban, but it should be reported as bad behavior.
    – M.A.R.
    Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 19:02
  • @inɒzɘmɒЯ.A.M - You asked for an example, that's an example./
    – Richard
    Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 19:03
  • 1
    That's not a perfectly valid example. They can see the transcript just from a Google search, and they can be not-logged in to see it. Then prolly you should bring up a feature-request and ask for transcript to be hidden from guest visitors. Not sure how well that'll be received though.
    – M.A.R.
    Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 19:06
  • @inɒzɘmɒЯ.A.M - Fair enough, let them get the transcript via google rather than serving it to them on a platter. Sheesh, only on SE could you have an argument about how much access to provide someone who'd just been banned. Everywhere else the answer is simple; ban = ban
    – Richard
    Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 19:22

I'd rather treat suspended users like anonymous ones, allow them to enter chat but don't show the avatar at all. The transcript is not a full replacement for being in the room as it isn't updated live. There is no harm to them being in the chat room apart from exploiting the list of users present in the room to annoy people.

Edititing the profile should be handled like on the main site, which is blocked when suspended.

  • 2
    If the user has earned a suspension, I don't feel sympathetic enough to go out of my way and show him a live updatable script, that's what I think. Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 8:48
  • 2
    While I'd be happy with this as a form of solution - I'm with @Madara if someone's warranted a suspension why honour them with the luxury of serving them live data via a websocket or two... Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 8:54
  • 2
    @MadaraUchiha Chat suspensions can be awfully random, they're not entirely comparable to regular suspensions that are enacted by moderators. But the main reason for me is that suspensions should remove all active abilities of a user, passive use of the site is not affected by main site suspensions, and I'd treat chat the same. Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 8:57
  • @MadScientist: It's not passive. The user can still spam join/leave, and write obnoxious messages in their chat profile, for all users to read. Those are active actions that can be taken to continue harassing the users in a chat room. Even ignoring them doesn't solve the problem because it makes their avatar to stand out even more. Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 9:30
  • And also, even in cases of false positive, the user being locked out of chat for 30 minutes won't really do any harm, not any more than what's currently being blocked. Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 9:32
  • 2
    @MadaraUchiha Yes, some things that are currently possible are active abilities, and I support disabling those when suspended. But simply reading a room is passive and not something I'd expect to be blocked by a suspension. Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 9:59
  • 1
    @MadScientist: How is it different from kicks then? Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 10:06

You must log in to answer this question.

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