Closed BgueC6595 closed 1 month ago
I like this, and have added the planned label :) thanks for the request! You should be able to do it in a channel the user doesn't have read access to without pinging them. Also worth mentioning that there is a lot of planned stuffed coming to the dev branch here soon. I'm not sure if this in there already but we'll take a look and if it's not this will be added!
What new feature would you like to see?
Pinging requires the person to be in the server. Doing
<@123456789123456789>
with the user ID does result in a "ping" but the bot spits out an error message in this caseI haven't tested if this error persists if you do the
<@id>
trick in a channel that a user does not have access to, but they're a member of the server otherwise.It would be nice if we were able to do this without pinging people. Either with just usernames (e.g.
!blockuser + user_name123
) or user IDs (!blockuser + 123456789123456789
). Not to mention, not pinging people is far less confrontational.I will also say it would be nice if there was a way for certain users (with perms) to check the block list. Currently there's no way for a non-host user to know what the block list looks like. At the very least it would be cool if doing
!blockuser [user]
(without +/-) would tell if you that user was blocked or not.Which of these categories fit your request?
None
Just checking...
review
branch.