I know that a user can only be pinged if they join a chatroom, but I'm not sure if that means they have to say something first or not.
121215
Let's say I want people to be able to ping me in a certain chat room for a few days.  Do I have to actually say something there, or is it enough to simply join the room? And do I remain pingable even after closing the room? If yes, for how long? And for how long if I said something?
56274
Recently, there was a user in the Tavern who was... um, either highly delusional or a bot. In any case, since unfortunately no employees were around at the time, it took us almost a full hour to get enough people to spam/offensive/abusive flag one of his messages in order to get a measly 30-minute chat ban.  All of us in Teachers' Lounge felt so helpless in that we could barely do anything in order to... well, be moderators. Even our custom "other" flags went unhandled since no employees were around at the time.  Therefore, I hereby propose that we assimilate chat.MSE into chat.SE!    , but it was from a long time ago, and things have changed.   chat.meta.SO is no more. The reasoning provided for having a separate meta chat was:     And MSO? hmm... well... er... hmmm... MSO is a curious beast; in part it discusses stackoverflow.com and in part it discusses the Stack Exchange Network.   That no longer applies after the MSO/MSE split. chat.SO is active enough to have a separate thing, but chat.MSE is much less so. (This is obviously true given the fact that it took over an hour for a single blue person to appear.) The above point is especially exemplary considering that most users with chat moderation privileges on Chat.SE don't have those privileges on Chat.MSE. In order to participate in Chat.MSE, users without the association bonus need to have explicit participation on this site. This is unlike Chat.SE, where any user whose combined rep across all sites is 20+ can chat in any chat room on any site (except Stack Overflow).  Meta isn't even as special as it used to be (yes yes I know, we're very special unicorns, but just listen to me), since it's now basically a "normal" site (in the technical sense. The users are... well, we're something different.). Since it's actually much less active than other *.SE.coms, I don't see why it's treated so differently.
71704
I've been looking around trying to find an answer to this question, but I haven't actually found a resource that gives a good answer. It continues to surprise me that chat is as separated as it is.  I ask because I can see the possibility for a couple good arguments as to why this should be the case, but they aren't immediately obvious to me. Still, I have to acknowledge the possibility that this configuration was intentional, since it seems too weird to be unintentional.  Is there a good reason why Stack Overflow chat is still on its network? If not, what is the historical reason/how did this come about?
11413
Lots of the first questions come with insufficient information, context and eventually left unanswered after days.  While other users comment below requesting more info, the inexperienced OP usually reply without @ believing it works exactly the same as facebook, but no one receives notification.   One or two days later, the OP feels really lost on the site, and convinced his/her question is so hard to be solved or the people on the site just trend to ignore him/her.  A little extreme example today on stackoverflow, a user deleted the question posted yesterday, and posted again to get other's attention. Simply because no one being notified.   Current  will notify other users when OP missed @ in such cases:   OP comment on an answer, the author of the answer will be notified. (not applicable, as most unnotified comments are under the question.) OP comment under his own post, and exactly one person commented. (not applicable in most cases, as a fuzzy question usually start a little discussion below.)   Which means basically, there won't be any notification for previous people who commented.   So is it possible to enforce (at least shows a tip) the new user comment with a @ in their first few comments?
15389
Chat is an offshoot of the main site, and using it is  during their time here.  Chat is our place for:        Real-time collaboration   Meeting fellow members of the community   Less structured, casual (but still roughly on-topic) conversation      Our chat system exists to serve the main site; users of each site can gather and commune with each other.  When in chat, we expect all users to abide by our  policy, which means that we expect community members to treat each other with respect.    While it is a place where the community can go to interact on a more casual level, chat still needs to be moderated by the community and there are tools in place to help with the moderation. This raises a few questions, that are addressed here:
99613
It appears  is back. Upon refreshing any chat page (even when dumping the cache and hard reloading), a chat flag notification is displayed, but there is no chat flag.
26104
Being able to join chat rooms from the Android app would be a plus! It would truly make us connected on the go, instead of having to sit down at our desks and open a browser window. This will allow more users to fully utilize the chat system and join events no matter where they are.
101890
Currently, oneboxing requires that the URL be the only thing in a chat message.  If additional text is added with the url in the same chat message, oneboxing won't work.  If other people are chatting, they can break in and divorce the onebox from the descriptive text:    Please fix chat in some way so that the descriptive text can stay with the onebox, without messages from other chat users breaking in:
93787
I've recently had one member in particular who wastes hours of my time asking/commenting about my posts without contributing anything productive towards answering them. I don't want to appear rude to other members (who obviously wouldn't be aware of the history), so I feel obligated to respond to each comment.   In addition, I've noticed that once this member starts participating I am significantly less likely to get input from other members (probably because they either assume that he's solving the problem, or because they get as big a headache as I do trying to read through the comments), and I'm therefore not getting questions answered if this member responds to them.  I don't believe that it would be appropriate and/or helpful to flag the comments  because there's nothing grossly wrong with a comment when viewed individually, and as far as I understand flags don't affect an individuals privileges.  Is there anything that I can currently do to limit and/or block this member from commenting/answering my posts, and if not, is this something that would be worthwhile considering in the future?
53358
I noticed that chat supports desktop notifications to notify you when someone pings you, which made me think that maybe the main site has this functionality as well, and I'd really like to use it in that case. But I couldn't find an option to turn them on anywhere.  Chrome notifications look like this:
109972
We know from the  that it is accepted only in a limited way in answers and frowned upon if found to be spammy. We know from  that it can be deleted at any time from comments if the comment is not relevant or spammy.  But what about the chat? This leaves chat to be the only legitimate place to promote products or services that the user is affiliated to (albeit in an ad-like way).  What is your opinion?
57942
Especially on technical sites, as even sporadic users will have noticed, new users very often don't include important information into the question they're posting.  This usually leads the first user passing by to leave a comment asking for clarifications, which punctually get posted in the comments section.  Many times there's not even the need for a user to ask OP to do so, OP just does that because they forgot something or because they want to improve their question by adding more details.  In any case this leads to:   Important information posted into the comments section, where they shouldn't stay; Question not bumping up in the active questions tab, which doesn't help fixing point #1; Unless OP pings one of the users that left a comment in doing so, none of the user who commented will get to know that the requested clarifications were posted, which doesn't help fixing point #1 either.   I think it would be convenient to prompt new users with a popup similar to the popup prompting to leave an explanation upon downvote when a new user leaves a comment under the following conditions:   OP hasn't been prompted before (i.e. do this only upon OP's first attempt to comment); OP is commenting on their own question; OP didn't benefit from the association bonus.   The message could go something like this (feel free to rephrase):     Comments shouldn't be used to add important information to the question; if you're adding information useful for your question to be answered, please  your question instead.   Mock-up:    This could also be a great opportunity to teach new users how to reply to comments:     Comments shouldn't be used to add important information to the question; if you're adding information useful for your question to be answered, please  your question instead. If you're replying to a comment of another user, you can use @username, where username is the username of the user you're replying to without spaces, to notify the user of your reply.   Mock-up:
95288
Quite often I have run into situations where I had an extensive talk with a newbie (about SO and/or programming itself) using the comments. Since you shouldn't use the comments to further discuss things (which are often off topic from the original question), I'd like to use the chat for those discussions.  As a matter of fact if you do use the comments to discuss something, you get a notification which tells you to move the discussion to a chat-room.  Unfortunately, most of those users don't have the required 20 reputations to talk in chat, so you also get this fancy orange box telling you that you can't move the discussion. This normally leads to using the comments again.  Don't get me wrong at this point, I'm NOT asking you to change this (I actually think it's a good thing).  My idea would be, that a user who has enough reps to talk in the Chat should be able to invite a user who doesn't have enough reps into a private Chat-room (just for the two of them).  The user with the &lt;20 reps would only be able to talk in this very room, e.g. would receive a "temporary privilege".  Edit As  pointed out, this is already possible but you need to be Moderator and it requires multiple steps. This gave me the impression that it shouldn't be that difficult to realize.
54828
Following scenario:   user registers, has 1 point user visits chat, notes he cannot post because of only 1 point and needs 20 user goes back to SO, answers a question. gets enough points to chat user goes back to chat, but his profile still shows 1 point   Now my questions:   How long does it take for the profile on chat to update? Is there a way to force updating?   Update: Logging in and out did not help.
39617
Well it might not be a huge issue to some (I suppose it depends on how you use the chat system) but when I "Ignore this user everywhere", their messages still appear on the sidebar for the 'other rooms you're in' if they say something. Albeit I can ignore this feature and the text within it, I just find it odd that I can still see it.   This is only a nuisance when you truly are annoyed by a user and ignoring them in the chat was the best possible alternative to leaving the room or starting an argument (no references here, but any long time chat user has been annoyed by some help vampire at one point in time or another and would just prefer to ignore them for good).   If you have no clue to the sidebar or preview I'm talking about: this is for you,    I have chosen to Ignore this user everywhere (Neal) and then switched to a new room, yet that users response appears in my 'preview' for the 'other rooms you're in' if he is also talking in them.  Note: My ignore of Neal was mostly due to jest, this in no way is to reflect on Neal but the chat feature (I hate to ever single anyone out here).
34604
There has been quite a few times that I wished I could send a message to another user on SO - not ask a question for everyone to see, but just a short message informing them of something or requesting them to do something.  Are there any plans to allow this to happen in the future?  Related:
19242
I flagged a post today, typed out a fairly thorough explanation, clicked the button... and got told that I'd already flagged this post (for something else, which I'd forgotten about) so this flag wasn't allowed.  (This happens if the first flag is still active.)  The dialogue with my explanation was gone at this point, so if I wanted to communicate with the moderators about that, I was going to have to start over.  (In case you're wondering how this could happen, one flag was related to the post itself and one was related to the user -- there being no way to flag a user directly, you have to hang it off of a post.  But I've also seen this with cases where the first flag hangs around unhandled for a week or two and I've forgotten about it.)  Since the system is going to detect that I've already flagged a post and reject a second flag, can it do that after I click the "flag" link instead of waiting until the end of the process?  (Or gray out the link so I can't click it in the first place?)  2015-12-18: someone suggested to me in chat today that this had been implemented, so I tested again.  The behavior has not changed: I flagged a post using "other", then flagged it again (also "other") before the first flag was handled, and the flag was rejected only after I'd typed the message.  (I did this on a site where I'm a moderator so I could then clean up after myself.)