Invisible join in on voice channels

Kommentarer

41 kommentarer

  • Anatomis (Perfect)
    Have an upvote from me. I liked this suggestion, and want to see it on Discord.
    19
  • anand

    Hello,

     

    I think this would be a great idea, especially for server moderators. In the discord servers I'm in, often someone swears, harasses, or threatens another in a voice channel. Then when a moderator enters the chat, they stop because they hear the sound of someone joining and sees the tag. A silent/invisible join/presence in a channel would be great for moderators who need to catch someone. The option could easily be enabled rightclicking the voice channel and clicking "silent join".

     

    Thanks
    Techno

    26
  • Aramdana

    I see the appeal for this but I think it could easily be abused, sometimes I'm having private conversations in vc's that are stopped when others join. With this feature a moderator could be listining in without my knoledge. For smaller server's where modderators arent as serious I could see this being an issue.

    -15
  • Midnight

    I disagree with this idea. It'd be abused and people would listen in on the conversations of others which is creepy, not helpful.

    -24
  • YunoGasai

    I find the idea that the moderator can sometimes listen without being seen excellent.
    There is far too much abuse from so many people and this will allow the moderator to banish someone with bad behavior without blaming others who have nothing to do with it.
    For private conversation, it's symple, don't come in group lounge lol :)

    15
  • Midnight

    I still don't think you get why that's creepy...

    -12
  • Conner
    dupe
    -8
  • moderators admins or server owners need this ability, far too often so people change their behavior to cloak their intent. as was previously stated, have private conversations in private not in public if that's an issue for you.

    10
  • anton_6464

    That would be an awesome feature 

    8
  • AZ infidel

    DM is where private conversation should take place, other then a locked channel VC is public

    16
  • 100% Ashly Simple

    I agree on this one. As a long-time server owner I find it very difficult to prove someone guilty of harassment if said harassment is being done through VCs. And if you're going to have a private conversation, move it to DMs, where private conversations are supposed to go.

    7
  • Droid

    Agree with this. I run a small server for my kids and their friends who are all between 6 and 12. I would like to be able to get on their channel once in awhile without them knowing so I can check on them. "Trust but verify" :)

    -10
  • Jrelvas

    @Droid underaged users are not allowed in discord, therefore you shouldn't use that as an example in the first place.

    8
  • *Ryu

    This would be fundamentally wrong in so many ways and in fact unlawful. 

    everyone has a right to privacy (you dont wave that right by joining) and such a tool would be abused far more often then used for good reasons.

     iam a curious person and the temptation would be to listen if someone talk shit about me or whatever. i rather get it straigh in person then behind my back. and people in my discord know that i can take critique. and what could i personaly gain from it? i would never be able to confront the person about it because i wasnt there. only 2 possibilitys are left when confronted. either i listened in or someone snitched, nothing good will come out of it and its not a way to establish trust in any way.

    this would totally be the autocratic way where a gouverment decied´s when and where they can listen in without cause or permission (yes i know that happens but trough loopholes in the system, if you listened to what edward snowden had to say)  harrasment not only happens in discord, it dous in real live, and everybody know how hard it is to proof these kind of accusations. thats why we have courts.

    and if your argument is, "well sometimes there are tapes of revealing conversations" iam sure the person who taped everything wasnt in the room in invisible mode. he just had a tool to record the conversation he had and not just heard.

    and last point, just because you are the admin dousnt mean you are the sane one.

    -5
  • Ichokuchi [ENG]

    @ryu this wouldnt be an option for any user would be for moderators of servers to make sure rules are being followed in the server, rules you as a user agreed to by accessing their server, so how would that be abusing it?

    5
  • MorphixGaming

    As a server owner i think this would be a great tool to have that way you can make sure everyone is following the rules and no ome is harrassing people. But i can also see how you would think this could be abused which is y i think only the server owner and moderators should have this option.

    3
  • hasrock36
     

    As a server owner and moderator in several channels, no this is an abhorrent idea that would be easily abused.

     
    1
  • Deanna

    This could absolutely be abused. A better option, if needed, is audited access to recordings, maybe for a short (30 minutes?) period.
    This should be flagged in the channel when joining, if it's enabled, and logged when it's accessed. I believe corporate slack accounts work in similar ways.

    0
  • Yurboi

    This is not how it works in corporate slack accounts. There are access logs, but NOT AT ALL visible to anyone who is being "examined." The level that accessed it and any higher levels have access to those records, anyone underneath or equal position to them is unable to see the logs.

    Secondly, if you are the owner of the channel and people know this ability exists, it would likely deter people from starting things in the first place, and if they agreed to join the channel, they agreed to the possibility of silent monitoring by moderators/owners. And of course this can be abused, much like it is in the corporate world(managers listen to side conversations of employees if they happen to leave their headset on, for example, its happened to me.)

    Third, it would be a moderation tool, and the servers that have it enabled would have a separate "server features" page, where things like this are all compiled, so anyone in the server can see if this option(or others like it in the future) are enabled.

    3
  • Rabid

    I love this idea. If you don't want people to hear your conversations then maybe don't have them in a 'public' discord channel.

    Private calls exist if you want to do that kind of thing. It's like people who post their dirty laundry all over their 'public' facebook wall then complain that people can read and respond to it.

    Then again, maybe have a community where you don't have members that require supervision like they're 2 year olds and are decent human beings to begin with.

    3
  • Sindrah

    In response to the people who feel it is wrong, creepy, or even the guy that says it is unlawful:

    People are in a PUBLIC AREA, not a private room. The server admins have the RIGHT to barge in. If you are having a private conversation in a public area, your privacy cannot be guaranteed nor expected. This would be no different than having a chat at your local pub with a person in the corner by the music box and the bartender walks over. If your conversation is that sensitive, take it to a DM, that has been a feature for a long time.

    As for creepy, that assertion depends on the conversation you are having. If you are talking about cars and innocuous stuff, suddenly realizing there is someone eavsedropping on your conversation won't feel very wierd, but it would feel creepy if you were talking about topics of a more intimate nature. The real question is, if it could feel creepy to be eavesdropped, you need to re-evaluate the subject matter you are freely discussing in a public scene.

    Large public servers employ staff members to moderate channels, and often there are real creeps that go undetected or unproven of their offensive nature simply because a mod can't reliably witness the behavior when it happens. Just like the admin privilege, a new privilege that must be granted by the server owner (or admin perm-granted role) could limit who can silent-join a chat room where they can only watch/listen.

    Right now, the only method to incognito-join a room to catch someone is to temp-join the server with another account on another connection and fully join the room. This can work in some cases, but in many it won't have an effective use if the offender won't engage with someone that sounds an awful lot like a moderator they know about, worse is if the behavior is cam-related and only occurs if "everyone turns cam on", and the tactic of joining as another "person" cannot work if the room is full.

    Silent Join (permission required like the admin perm or manage perms are) is a great feature we could use and it cannot be accomplished with a bot in any way. If people really feel this feature is not appropriate for small servers or private servers, then I say make it a Level 1-3 Nitro Boost requirement (like the bigger stream capabiltiies are) and/or require public server status and/or minimum number of members a requirement.

    However it is done, this is a big must have for large public servers that are struggling to moderate the real creeps and boneheads.

    6
  • Sindrah

    forgot to add a caveat to such a feature:

    if the ability to silent join is made, it needs to be a permission under Administrator (people with admin have all perms and bypass) that can only be granted if you have admin (owner is always admin by default and cannot be revoked unless owner is transferred).

    Also, users that can silent-join can see other users that are silent-joined in a VC room. This will eliminate accidental overlap of moderators/admins when watching different channels, and acts as a "check" against lower-level mods that were watching/listening but claim they weren't.

    I highly support the idea of locking this feature to Boosted servers, public servers, and/or servers that have a minimum number of users (the real use-case for such a feature anyway)

    5
  • tarun !i

    I feel like that is not the reason u want this feature added. Very creepy

    -4
  • APLeith

    I believe that there are significant benefits to this addition. I believe it is more important to be able to properly monitor your voice chat for aggressive violations than to worry about general creepiness. If you want to have a private chat with someone, move off the server for that conversation.

    Possible suggestions would be to create this as an opt-in feature for a server/channel and any server/channel that has this feature enabled has a warning in one of the corners that this call may not be private. You can also set it up so that other administrators and moderators are made aware when someone has entered a voice channel as invisible. This would force admin/mod teams to self-moderate.

    6
  • Slago

    Ya, I agree they should do this and for people that want a private chat, they should just go in DM's. I also think that if this happens the mods and admin should be able to see each other even if they are invisible (Maybe a mini emoji to show that they are invisible) so you know that they are already doing the job.

    6
  • ChDeruuuun

    I do think that this can be a good feature for the admins and moderators of a server. However, it of course will be abused by some or most users.

    On the good side, it can make admins and moderators in the server check if there are any issues and such. This can help these admins and moderators give out more services and such to make sure that they kick or ban people who are disobeying their server rules or more.

    However, this can make things that are private, not private at all. Well to some of them. And I also do think that through this feature, not many people will be able to tell if there are people in the call or not, which makes them hesitate to say something.

    2
  • ClaireVoyance

    I think The idea is a good one. For the reasons of enforcing a rule. It can't be abuse either. If some people wanna have a private conversation there is dm's for that. Not public vc's

    2
  • Top-J

    Here's our use case in support of this type of feature.

    We run a gaming server. We keep it clean and the server follows many of Discords policies of acceptable use. Unfortunately gamers can and will be toxic. Some gamers were upset and went off on other gamers spouting hate speech and other things. The members that were on the receiving end did not know how to record. Having a visible recording in the voice channel would also have stopped the conversation. 

    The ability to record voice and/or listen in on conversations "invisible" would have solved this. It would also allow for a log to be sent to discord to ban/remove them from the platform as it violates their TOS. 

    To the skeptics about this being unlawful or abused... Go have a private conversation, go have a 1 on 1 or make your own discord server. The purpose of our server is a public forum for a gaming community. (or whatever community you are part of)

    If privacy is a concern but a giant banner or message go to new members (this server has enabled voice recording/logging - your voice conversations may be logged and/or recorded). 

    4
  • Sindrah

    As staff, we can already jump into any chat and everyone knows it... why should it matter if a member has no way to know a staff member is secretly listening/watching what is going on in a VC they are moderating? If you have a "club" where people can congregate and chat/interact in person, and there are a few staff members that check on everyone from time to time and respond to cries for help, even in other "rooms", does it matter that a security staff member has the ability to listen/watch a security camera feed everywhere? At least on Discord, ALL staff members can see which staff members are silently listening/watching and where, which allows staff to help audit other staff. How is this "creepy" or "abusive"?

    3
  • Sindrah

    As a Moderator of a very large Adult Server (https://discord.gg/Druncord), I am in the same boat as Top-J when it comes to catching bad apples. Often in the massive nights online (especially on weekends), we have upwards to 100+ members online at the same time throughout our many VC channels. Our biggest issue is that we get reports or mentions to our staff about some people doing things that are against our rules (most of our rules generally cover ToS/Community-Guidelines violations as it is), but it's just one or two people that had the presence of mind to contact us about it while its happening, but often times its more than one bad apple doing it and they band together to hide the truth. We try to watch these bad Apples, but they tend to hide away when we join in.

    We get DMs from our tippers that the moment a staff member enters, the bad-actors suddenly act appropriate and follow rules. Silent joining would allow us to catch these people doing these things. I'm talking about people that are doing hard drugs on camera, showing genitals, pointing guns at cam/self, being bluntly racist, threatening people, doxxing, etc.. Our staff policy is akin to most other large organizations: If it's just your words, it would be unfair to sanction or ban someone without any real proof.

    Again, if Silent/invisible Join were only possible under an Admin-like privilege as opposed to being freely possible for anyone and everyone, there would be a near-zero possibility of abuse as only server staff could do it (the very people that such a feature would be properly desired by). In this day and age, too many people can just skate by the rules because there is no way to ensure a server of 2000+ people is monitored 24/7/365, especially when the staff is not being paid to do their job (we are purely doing this job of our own free will without compensation).

    4

Du måste logga in om du vill lämna en kommentar.