No Muting Group Sessions?

Hi. i wan't to say i really love the new group tools. It's almost everything i wanted. The main thing i wanted was the ability to mute group sessions for selected groups. I find it anoying when i'm interupted cuz someone want's to say hi to a group then everyone and their dog replies saying "hi, hello, 42, LOL, RUF!, DIE!, <everyone leaves session>", and sometimes i just wan't to mute it... I don't wish to leave the groups cuz they are IMPORTANT. If we did have this added i would really apreciate it... Maybee i overlooked it and it is there someplace? It's kinda hard to tell in that large jungle of features.

Even not muting but somehow making it less obtrusive, really a direct IM should be treated different to a group. Perhaps the group appearing as a number of unread messages but not making a noise or something.

I didn't see it there either Yiffy, it was one of the few group features I had hoped to get. I'll save the other for a different thread.

Belonging to a number of "product support" groups is frustrating when they are spammed. Since there is currently no "appear offline" feature like on Xbox Live this would have at least limited the amount of intrusion into conversations or work.

Doesn't the new group roles system have a "can send IM to group" permission/action?
If not, why not?

Why not impliment a client side mute to a group as a stop gap? If the client gets an IM from a group the player has muted trash it.

Kelly: you're right - it's not what we want to hear. It is, however, _far_ better than hearing nothing. I'm a *nix sysadmin IRL, so I know that sometimes, it just takes a lot of work to update an old system to remove roadblocks. I assume that you've looked into this and found that it isn't possible, to make some sort of temporary stopgap - for example setting a group 'no IM' so that nobody can IM the group at all (the UserServer wouldn't need to know any details about the group being IMed's roles, just it's basic configuration data), or sending this data to the client and relying on client-side blocks temporarily until the UserServer can be upgraded/replaced, as Jon Rolland seems to recommend.
No need to cringe, it's not your fault the UserServer wasn't designed to handle this way back when it wasn't known this would be an issue. I at least understand that fixing something like that will take time - we just want to know that LL knows it should be fixed and is working on it. You're right, it is better to focus on what can be done now, and leave the things like this till after the easy stuff is done. Eat the low-hanging fruit first, as they say. Most residents don't want to make unreasonable requests - now we know why this will be difficult I suspect most of us will be happy to stop complaining about it and allow you more time to deal with it as we know it's being dealt with.

I'm all for Jon's suggestion. A client-side mute as a stopgap measure.

Thanks for the feedback kelly.

Hmm talking about that offline status mode perhaps we can trick the group system into thinking we are offline?

Kelly thats EXACTLY what everyone wanted to hear. That you're actively acknowledging the issue and intend on working on it. But have reasons to be doing things like you are. You dont have to give us the solution to everything we want. But answers like this (informative) make everyone happy as we can now _understand_ all sides related. More of these posts in the future would be great and please do NOT feel the need to apologize (though its appreciated too).

Thank you for taking the time to enlighten us.

A reply from Kelly about client side muting of group chats would be nice.

Can't have too many Linden responses, don't want you get addicted eh?

When?

Please, those who would like to be able to mute group chat, push for this.

Getting 1.12 out as soon as possible is good, as it means we'll get a huge leap forward in groups as soon as possible.

I know the groups system isn't really meant to address problems with, say, push control.... but imagine a parcel set 'no script', but with everyone in its group granted the power to overrride this. You could use this to stop passers-by using weapons on your parcel but allow your regulars to use AOs.

This option alone will do a LOT to stop weapons griefing, for example.

Also, consider allowing members of your group to deed objects to it and thus to contribute to your build without letting them delete/return everything else on your parcel.

Oh, it's just so *good*. Getting this update will make me happy for awhile

Ok, there are a few more things I'd like added :
1)"can start a new group IM session"
2)"can reply to existing group IM sessions"
3) start an IM to all the people in a role, or roles, that you choose (so your IM session doesn't have to go to everyone in a group)
[yes, I know all those 3 were about group IMs. I realise these won't happen for awhile, but I can dream ]

Now for a few that aren't related to IMs :
4) "can return objects not set to group" (to cover objects set to group but not deeded to group)

5) What permissions will group owned objects get? Will there be a role for 'group-owned objects' whose permissions we can change?
6) Same questions as #5, but for objects which are set to group but not owned by group.