Multi-person pages/whispers/messages

[Dragonwolf]

Hey all.

I would like to request a feature that would enhance the paging/messaging/whisper system on Wolfery.

We currently seem to have, from what I have experimented, single-person messages. w person1 =: <message>

I’d like to request an enhancement that would allow you to message multiple people at the same time with the same message.

w person1, person2, person3 =:<message>
Whether this is whispers or pages.

This will make it easier for multiple characters to organize and talk in private in public rooms especially if there is a public scene going on.

[Accipiter]

Hi @Dragonwolf!
Forgive my slow response.
Yes. I considered starting on this one as it has been requested for quite a while!

Scope

I think the multi-targettng should initially be for: address, whisper, message
I will wait with mails with multiple recipients.

But further on, I will mainly use Whisper for the examples.

Basic command

The command with comma separation, as suggested, should work well:

w Jane, John Doe := leans in closer to both of you ,"Right?"

Repeated command

Using just w or whisper without a target character should target those of your previous whisper:

w =: gives Jane and John a discrete nod.

Chat log for receiver

Previous, when you received a whisper from someone, the label would say Whisper from <Full name>. I think this need to change, and we instead use Whisper to <Full name>:

When you receive a multi-target message, the name displayed in the whisper label should be the name of your character, with the addition of +X more:

Whisper to John Doe +1 more

And if you do mouse-over (or tap on the message for mobile), you will see all targeted characters, separated by comma:

Chat log for sender

The message should look the same for the sender as for the receiver. But the name displayed in the label should be the first one in your command list:

w John Doe, Jane Doe = Hello!

Should result in:

Whisper to John Doe +1 more

Because John Doe was first in the list.

Reply to multiple-target whisper

We should add a Reply option to these type of messages in the message menu (the ⋮ menu you see when hovering over a message, or tapping a message on mobile)

Reply will automatically fill the console with the command to reply to the sender + all receivers (sender will be first):

whisper Accipiter Nisus, Jane Doe = 

It will reply using the same method (address, whisper, message) as the message used. If someone wants to reply to an address with a whisper, then they can simply edit the generated console command.

Mmm. Have I forgotten something?
Any comments?

[Accipiter]

Also. What should happen if one of the targets are invalid? Let’s say Jane left the room before you finished your whisper command:

w John, Jane = Should we go right away?

Alternatives:

1. The message is sent just to John. If so, how should we tell that Jane didn’t receive it?
2. We get an error that Jane was not in the room, causing the command to fail.

[Shinyuu]

@Accipiter

1. We get an error that Jane was not in the room, causing the command to fail.

This is preferred, otherwise the context might be lost.

[Dragonwolf]

No worries about slowness at all! I am happy to hear the thought is out there, yay!

I do feel a comma-separate command is perhaps the best way!

I am a little skeptical of the repeat command… I can see its usage, but this is merely a concern of my own where I am a dingus and see myself messaging the wrong person mistakenly, hehehe.

I think the receiver should have an idea who the message came from AND who the message was sent to, including the names, not just a +1, and I wouldn’t have it hidden under a hover. (Maybe it’ll show the first 3 or 4, depending on screen size? thereafter it adds the +# more)

If we look at a mistake occuring, it may be lost to the sender that the message wasn’t sent correctly to everyone. Having both an error message and a clear list of who received the message is ideal. (I say ‘ideal’, but we may be constrained by interface issues)

Originally I was of the mind that the message would try send to each person and send it to its target, if one message fails, the sender is notified.

But, honestly… If it is at all possible, I think the message should fail in its entirety if one of the receivers is unable/unavailable. This will allow the sender to change the format or amend their mistake so that receivers aren’t spammed with a correction.

Looking at the reply button, it would be a nice-to-have, that if you click reply to user1, it would spin up the command for them in the chat window, and it would be nice if you did the same to user2, so that it would append it to that chat command. It a nice to have, but not overly necessary.

click reply user1

p user1 =:

click reply user2

It’ll alter the above command to:

p user1, user2 =:

I do foresee some hindrances, such as what if a person tries to click reply to user1 multiple times and so on.

[WakuWaku]

Using page #reply is often how a lot of bad mav’s happen to me. So I’ve built the habit into typing all recipients names out, haha.

Edit: This still happens when I type the wrong name in. -.-

[Accipiter]

No worry! I will not have a #reply kind of feature.
The Reply menu option will generate a full list of recipients!

[Accipiter]

Okay. I agree to Error in case any target is invalid.

But, what about characters set as Do Not Disturb?

It differs from invalid characters in the way that they have a Do Not Disturb message that will be returned to the sender.

Example

Accipiter sends a message where John Doe is set as Do Not Disturb:

msg Jane Doe, John Doe = Hi guys!

If we filter out John from the message, the sender would see:

A possible solution is to include John as a target in the message sent to Jane (even if John never sees it), but to indicate that some were set as Do Not Disturb::

Message to Jane Doe +1 dnd

Hovering/clicking the message would show exactly who was set to DnD.

[WakuWaku]

I’ve always thought of multi page/whispering as for use in ongoing RP. If someone has left or is on dnd it should fail to send. If you are multi page whispering folks not available maybe this is encroaching on maybe you should not do.

Say perhaps one wanted to page every person with a certain tag, asking for RP. I would consider this poor RP etiquette. Should we consider a limit on the number of people you can page/whisper at once? Like lead is at 5, I like that.

As for the option button reply button, this may be too fiddly mouse clicky to use in RP for me where timing is important. If there is no #reply option I may not use it at all (especially if it is a few pixels away from the report button)

Multi person mails has really come to good use for me in the past. A lot of times people will send out page #mail telling all their friends Merry Christmas, or my RL has gotten in the way and I need to take a break. And I have treasured those mails.

[Dragonwolf]

Aye… I still mess up when I’m supposed to whisper or page someone and instead post it as an IC message in the room I’m in with /me or : hahaha. It always happens.

[Dragonwolf]

I am in agreement that if there is an issue with sending one message, the entire thing should fail. If that is possibly implementable.

It allows the sender to alter, change, rectify a possible mistake. This can also occur when you are typing a huge post and have already typed the names of those you want to send to and then someone with the same first name appears.

Example, John Doe is one I am typing to, John Doodle is a recent wake up.

I would type (usually) w john, jane =:say, "Sup?" and it would work.

What would be nice is if the system could then red out Johns name and fail the message entirely. Then the sender could check what is wrong, and or an appropriate error message appearing stating something like “There are currently two John’s online. Please specify which, in your command.” (Something like that)

With regards to the reply button… I feel like it may not be used as much… Maybe if you have a touch screen device? It could possibly be used with mobile phones. But with it so close to the report button, it might cause some hassles for admin/staff if false reports come in.

And perhaps there should be some multi-page restrictions. What this number is I can not say. I have heard some scenes of up to 6 people, but I would reckon at that size, they have their own room.

[Shinyuu]

@Dragonwolf

And perhaps there should be some multi-page restrictions

Knowing you I absolutely read that as a limit on the pages of text, not people involved. But yeas; It feels like if there are more than five people involved they’d be better off to a room or the syntax will get too clumsy to handle.

[Dragonwolf]

GASP! Calling me out, sheesh. Hahaha. But I can understand why. We should start selling sun glasses to sheild us from walls of white text xD

[Accipiter]

I’ve created two GitHub issues:

Multiple targets

Reply menu option

[Windchaser]

I’d like to see an equivalent to p #multimax to limit the number of people you’re included in a message with. Some people just don’t like it. Especially with the possibility of it turning into a ‘reply all’ email brouhaha.