Jump to content

The use of macros in kick/ban


Would you find the ability to use a macro in the kick/ban window useful?   

18 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you find the ability to use a macro in the kick/ban window useful?

    • Yes
      11
    • No
      7


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Members

I'm suggesting that xat allow the use of a macro in the ban/kick window. For example, when on promo, if I had my macro "$inapp" set to say "Inappropriate behavior on promotion.", it would be useful to be able to use the $inapp macro have the output be "I have banned xxx for 1 hour because Inappropriate behavior on promotion."

 

I foresee a number of applications that the use of macros in ban/kick could have.

 

EDIT: This could also be a power? The ability to do this could be paid. (modmacros) .. just an idea

 

5f1c2e2d51882c86e29b9771ee4c1752.png

 

Credit to Swanky for the idea

 

Cheers

  • Award 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

Harrison, the point of adding this is so that if i go to ban a user, I can type in the reason $inapp. When you use the rapid power, all it says for the ban reason is 'rapid', but this allows you to put a REAL reason without having to explain why you banned or kicked them. Example:

$inapp= Inappropriate on promotion

Ban reason: $inapp

  • Award 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Members
15 minutes ago, Swanky said:

Harrison, the point of adding this is so that if i go to ban a user, I can type in the reason $inapp. When you use the rapid power, all it says for the ban reason is 'rapid', but this allows you to put a REAL reason without having to explain why you banned or kicked them. Example:

$inapp= Inappropriate on promotion

Ban reason: $inapp

I understand now. It was confusing before but your picture made it clear.

Still hesitant.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Members

If a mod is this lazy, I don't want them modding my chat :$

 

People mock Help staff/users for using macros to help people (I agree it's stupid to use macros; if your definition of "helping" a user is simply sending a pre-written phrase, you might as well just set up a bot with responses and have no mods). I feel the same about kicking and banning. It just makes the mods more lazy and if they're so lazy that they can't type a reason themselves, why are they a mod in the first place?

 

Not to mention, a long reason isn't usually necessary (often times "inapp" is sufficient enough because all of xat knows what it means).

 

I don't think it's a terrible idea for a function power (as some of these have been pretty pointless), but only if xat is really desperate...

  • Award 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Members
3 minutes ago, Steven said:

If a mod is this lazy, I don't want them modding my chat :$

 

People mock Help staff/users for using macros to help people (I agree it's stupid to use macros; if your definition of "helping" a user is simply sending a pre-written phrase, you might as well just set up a bot with responses and have no mods). I feel the same about kicking and banning. It just makes the mods more lazy and if they're so lazy that they can't type a reason themselves, why are they a mod in the first place?

 

Not to mention, a long reason isn't usually necessary (often times "inapp" is sufficient enough because all of xat knows what it means).

 

13 minutes ago, Harrison said:

I understand now. It was confusing before but your picture made it clear.

Still hesitant.

 

 

Thank you for your opinions. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
9 minutes ago, Steven said:

If a mod is this lazy, I don't want them modding my chat :$

 

People mock Help staff/users for using macros to help people (I agree it's stupid to use macros; if your definition of "helping" a user is simply sending a pre-written phrase, you might as well just set up a bot with responses and have no mods). I feel the same about kicking and banning. It just makes the mods more lazy and if they're so lazy that they can't type a reason themselves, why are they a mod in the first place?

 

Not to mention, a long reason isn't usually necessary (often times "inapp" is sufficient enough because all of xat knows what it means).

 

I don't think it's a terrible idea for a function power (as some of these have been pretty pointless), but only if xat is really desperate...

There's a difference between laziness and efficiency. I don't allow people who moderate my chats to use rapid because it doesnt give a clear reason why they were banned, that is inefficient. This allows a faster method of explaining ban reasons, and if you're the type of person to include screenshots in your ban reasons for events, you can simply just type $inapp<paste proof>

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Members

Extremely good idea. This is not about laziness at all. It's the complete opposite.

 

It would allow moderators to give full reasons that are easy for the user to understand. It also makes documentation very neat. All these benefits come with the main goal of moderating more quickly.

 

I see no problems.

  • Award 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Members

I like this idea, but I don't like the idea of certain staff using it. (I don't like them being staff either, but I can't do much about it) They don't know who they are, but we do.

  • Award 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Members
17 hours ago, xCody said:

I'm suggesting that xat allow the use of a macro in the ban/kick window. For example, when on promo, if I had my macro "$inapp" set to say "Inappropriate behavior on promotion.", it would be useful to be able to use the $inapp macro have the output be "I have banned xxx for 1 hour because Inappropriate behavior on promotion."

 

I foresee a number of applications that the use of macros in ban/kick could have.

 

EDIT: This could also be a power? The ability to do this could be paid. (modmacros) .. just an idea

 

5f1c2e2d51882c86e29b9771ee4c1752.png

 

Credit to Swanky for the idea

 

Cheers

so ive added this to my client and it works pretty well :)

54f7a0a9a890c50f0d9b63b82af317c8.gifb87ea6e05673046c50becebb4b1b7e8d.gif

Once again thanks @SlOom for the gifs

  • Award 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Game Makers
17 hours ago, xCody said:

I'm suggesting that xat allow the use of a macro in the ban/kick window. For example, when on promo, if I had my macro "$inapp" set to say "Inappropriate behavior on promotion.", it would be useful to be able to use the $inapp macro have the output be "I have banned xxx for 1 hour because Inappropriate behavior on promotion."

 

I foresee a number of applications that the use of macros in ban/kick could have.

 

EDIT: This could also be a power? The ability to do this could be paid. (modmacros) .. just an idea

 

5f1c2e2d51882c86e29b9771ee4c1752.png

 

Credit to Swanky for the idea

 

Cheers

 

Nice idea, but macros system is a feature, so it should stay as feature. No need to have a power for that.

 

And good work, @Techy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Wiki Translators

Meh, no.

 

If it was to be made, the kicking / banning user should be able to pick a preset reason from a drop-down menu (the main owner would be able to manage it). The point of this suggestion is to make it more user-friendly and having it as a macro (would require each staff to set it) would make it pointless.

 

It should also be a feature, not a power. And I would rather not having it to be honest.

 

Agreed with Elie and Steven's posts.

 

 

  • Award 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Members
4 hours ago, Arthur said:

If it was to be made, the kicking / banning user should be able to pick a preset reason from a drop-down menu (the main owner would be able to manage it). The point of this suggestion is to make it more user-friendly and having it as a macro (would require each staff to set it) would make it pointless.

Nice idea, but I think the main goal here is to make the macro feature more consistent. It should have just worked like this from the start.

  • Award 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Wiki Editors

I agree with the argument about consistency. There's no real point in this not being there, since it's a function already in the chat and should be able to be utilized in other places other than the message box.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Wiki Translators
5 hours ago, Brandon said:

Nice idea, but I think the main goal here is to make the macro feature more consistent. It should have just worked like this from the start.

Well, yeah. When I first discovered macros, I tested it a lot for fun and it surprised me when I figured out that it wouldn't work for kick and ban reasons.

 

But I still don't like the idea of having it for the same reasons that Elie and Steven pointed in their posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Members
2 hours ago, Arthur said:

Well, yeah. When I first discovered macros, I tested it a lot for fun and it surprised me when I figured out that it wouldn't work for kick and ban reasons.

 

But I still don't like the idea of having it for the same reasons that Elie and Steven pointed in their posts.

 

I think it's important to note that you guys are basing your negativity for this idea on the qualities of the staff in a certain chat. I like the idea, and think it can be useful. However, if you guys are not supportive of it because of certain individuals then I would suggest looking away from this and digging deeper in to what the actual problem is. 

 

Not trying to stir up the pot or anything, but like Brandon said this would provide a lot better documentation which I can easily say would make his life way easier, along with all other owners / main owners. 

  • Award 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Members

Yes, why wouldn't something like this be useful? It serves no downsides, and grants moderators an extra option. The main use of a staff member is to moderate the chat, laziness doesn't come in to play so long as they kick/ban. Staff members should be trusted, so they shouldn't be lazy in the first place anyway.

 

 I would actually argue that this would encourage staff members to kick/ban because it is simply easier to do so using macros.

 

The fact that this gives a full description of the thing the user did wrong with little effort from the staff member means there will be less complaining from other users. As well as this, it gives staff less of an excuse to give no reason for a ban (yes, this actually happens a lot on official chats.)

  • Award 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
  • Advanced Members

We already have bots dominating chats, we don't need users becoming even more robotic too. If you're that lazy, don't be staff, simple.

This is like suggesting a motorbike to a professional cyclist, you're encouraging them to be LAZY.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Volunteers
25 minutes ago, Ryan said:

We already have bots dominating chats, we don't need users becoming even more robotic too. If you're that lazy, don't be staff, simple.

This is like suggesting a motorbike to a professional cyclist, you're encouraging them to be LAZY.

 

You can either see this as lazy or as easing work.

 

But do you want to say me people use proper reasons when they kick/ban people? They often just write "flood" to get it quickly done, so i don't really see why you wouldn't just add $flood and it'll give out a more 'explaining' reason

Nonetheless, there could be a setting to turn this off/on for your chat.

  • Award 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Members
14 hours ago, Ryan said:

We already have bots dominating chats, we don't need users becoming even more robotic too. If you're that lazy, don't be staff, simple.

This is like suggesting a motorbike to a professional cyclist, you're encouraging them to be LAZY.

When did efficiency become laziness?

  • Award 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.