5

I know that in comment the number of mentions (@user) is limited to one (in addition to the OP).

But in some cases, as in How do I prevent one user in particular from accessing my home directory?, I would like to mention a specific group of users --- for example, a @close-voters would be very useful here (and in other Q&A, too).

Is this possible? If not, would be a candidate for asking for a new feature in the main meta site?

Clearly this feature should be limited. For example

  • Access "group mentions" only with >2k reputation in general,
  • Never allows mention @close_voters or @down_voters on your own question or answer (or maybe with >20k rep?);
  • Limit "group mentions" to one of them per question/answer and "sending user" (even if later deleting the comment).

with such limitations it could be a useful instrument and not so suitable for spam or vindictive actions.

9
  • 1
    It would be an interesting feature, but I can tell you if I'm voting to close something I read all the comments - and you can ping me in chat and quote the comment.
    – RobotHumans
    Commented Apr 15, 2015 at 8:36
  • 4
    I think it's a really good idea that might make our life easier. The work-around now is: Mark as a favourite question, revisit when closed. edit and leave a big bold comment why this is not a duplicate, vote to re-open. (re-open votes are quicker to accrue then close votes) If you want, I can cast the last close vote and then we can start the process of re-opening...
    – Fabby
    Commented Apr 15, 2015 at 9:00
  • 1
    I like the idea of @ down-voters or @ close-voters . Note - you will still be relying on those users to respond or comment, but getting notice of an update or edit would be nice.
    – Panther
    Commented Apr 16, 2015 at 3:27
  • What is the procedure to submit a new feature proposal?
    – Rmano
    Commented Apr 16, 2015 at 5:27
  • 2
    @Rmano you pretty much just did, however I think a concerning issue here is that it could be used as a spam / disruptivity vector to attack down voters, close voters, etc. You also have to consider down voters and upvoters in two contexts: answers, and questions. I think implementation-wise there's holes in the request.
    – Thomas Ward Mod
    Commented Apr 26, 2015 at 3:01
  • 1
    @ThomasW. I see. Obviously it should be restricted at, say, 2k reputation or something like that. Will update the question.
    – Rmano
    Commented Apr 26, 2015 at 10:28
  • 1
    I'd just like to mention that similar stuff have been suggested several times to SE, but they always used to get declined. example but all of the ones I know of are quite a few years old. Maybe SE might reconsider now.
    – Dan
    Commented Apr 28, 2015 at 17:00
  • 1
    Voting is meant to be a private action. Would adding '@down-voters' (etc.) compromise this?
    – kiri
    Commented Apr 30, 2015 at 10:30
  • @minerz029 to the end user, probably not, but you sacrifice some backend stuff, and unless coded right you could 'leak' the data to the clients. But it would be against the current idea of how highlights work.
    – Thomas Ward Mod
    Commented May 7, 2015 at 18:15

0

Reset to default

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .