Removing User from a Wobble should not trigger the New-Notification
Uepsilon opened this issue · 6 comments
When removing Users from a Wobble - independent of who removed them, whether it was the user himself or another user - the "new"-counter should not be increased.
This should be done to prevent Wobbles from popping out of the archive when someone is removed as there is no really new stuff going on.
Deleting Replies does not trigger this mechanism either, should be lined up.
But you still want to see the message? Currently the "new" counter is a count of messages + unread posts.
I don't know if this message is relevant. And the behavior of removing an user from a wobble is certainly not the same as removing a reply, because there is no notification when a reply is deleted. So either it should notify about removed replies too or it should not notify about removed users.
To avoid massive Notifications, i'd prefer to remove the notification upon removing a user. Or you make it customizable per user which notifications it'll show ;)
Closing was not my intention, just missclicked ;)
I don't agree. Having a message when a user gets removed is feature for me.
But isn't the actual problem here, that a user removing himself from a topic make the topic coming back from the archive? There are multiple solutions to this:
- Do not reset the archive flag for user adding/removing (Fine to me)
- Add a mute state and no do reset the archive flag, if mute is also set
- When archiving, also set mute (includes previous)
Google Wave had a mute button, but they also had multiple folders and a "all messages" folder. Waves returned there to the inbox for every new message/change. Muting prevented this. Archiving propably removed it from the inbox and muted it. I don't remember exactly.
So I would either go with my first or last solution. Opinions? (cc @Velrok, @Nesurion)
Indeed it can be very annoying that wobble come back when people decide to remove them selfs from old wobbles.
Personally I don't care which implementation you choose.
I would go with whatever is easier to implement, since this case is very rare anyway.
Closed due to inactivity.