Settings and activity
71 results found
-
3 votes
thesunstar
supported this idea
·
-
4 votesthesunstar
supported this idea
·
-
1,359 votes
We’re reviewing this. Curious how long you think would be ok.
An error occurred while saving the comment -
1,619 votesthesunstar
supported this idea
·
-
470 votesthesunstar
supported this idea
·
-
538 votesthesunstar
supported this idea
·
-
613 votes
We would like to offer an “off-duty mode” for Mods, but it isn’t one of our top priorities at the moment. Will revisit in 2021.
thesunstar
supported this idea
·
-
684 votesthesunstar
supported this idea
·
-
904 votesthesunstar
supported this idea
·
-
960 votesthesunstar
supported this idea
·
-
1,557 votesthesunstar
supported this idea
·
Though I understand why people are frustrated, I'm far more against being able to take inactive usernames than than I am for it.
I feel that if it has to happen then there at the very least has to be several thorough warnings with a long time period between warnings and any action taken.
As said by others: usernames of Streamers (as opposed to Viewers) shouldn't be able to be taken just because of inactivity.
Honestly, I think this should remain a special case type situation where Streamers who have been of a certain size reliably for a while, can request a username that they are already well known as - in order to improve their findability. I.E. if they wanted <InsertName> but it was taken and thus when creating their account took <InsertName>1337, but everyone calls them <InsertName> and they are well known for it, AND the user with <InsertName> is a Viewer that has been inactive for years: then perhaps that is a situation in which the Streamer could specially request the inactive username. Rather than that any random Viewer who wishes to have a particular username can take someone else's.