Create a private thread to warn a user if they can't be DMd

[pulsar ruin]

If nimi tries to warn someone and isn't able to, it should create a private thread in #off-topic to ping a warned user and let them know they've been warned and why, then immediately lock (but not close) the thread to prevent follow up messages from being sent by the warned user. This would ensure that no one misses out on being warned even if they have their DMs off for the server.

[pliant helm]

You yourself should know that threads inherit the permissions of their parent channel and thus this is entirely impossible.

[pulsar ruin]

Not private threads

Private threads only allow people who have been pinged in the channel and people with manage threads to see them

[pliant helm]

That is a monstrous amount of effort to cater to someone who’s got their DM’s closed. We shouldn’t have to be made to do extra work to accommodate someone who can just check message requests. Or just turn on “accept dm’s” from this server

[pulsar ruin]

Its only two API requests and I'm sure whatever library Nimi is using probably makes it even easier

• One request to create the thread with the ping + warning content if DM fails (you can set it as private in the same request) https://discord.com/developers/docs/resources/channel#start-thread-without-message
• One request to lock the thread (you could omit this step entirely if you implemented this in a channel where users weren't able to send messages in threads) https://discord.com/developers/docs/topics/threads#editing-deleting-threads

[pliant helm]

My original question remains of why should we go through extra lengths for someone who’s got their DM’s closed? You should never have them fully closed, message requests at the worst, because as an admin of various servers I am not going to struggle for someone who’s making a moderators job harder

[pulsar ruin]

Because you're a pretty large server in which it's not uncommon for people to have DMs closed to avoid spam or just annoying people. But if you don't care about your members, I can't change your priorities.

I would also think as moderators, it's your job to communicate to someone when they are warned so that they have the chance to change their behavior accordingly and improve their participation in the community. It's certainly easier to do so if they don't have their DMs off but it seems to shirk responsibility to say "well, we'll just let them continue breaking the rules until we just decide to ban them," not just for the person in question but for the rest of the server who is subject to that person's behavior because they haven't been corrected

This doesn't seem like it would take a lot of time to implement as I've already described, but could potentially save a lot of trouble for moderators by being able to properly communicate issues to people who have DMs off instead of letting those issues continue or escalate

[pliant helm]

When a user first breaks a rule (and most times they break a rule) they’re either pinged in chat to knock off whatever behavior they’re doing, or sent a verbal warning by nimi. Again, going out of our way to make an entirely new system to cater to people who have their DM’s closed entirely isn’t something we’ll be doing. As a general member of a server, in the majority of servers, you’re expected to have your DM’s open to atleast requests so staff of that server can contact you privately if need be without jumping through any sort of hoops. By keeping your DM’s willfully closed, no matter your reasoning, you objectively make any and all servers staff require extra effort just to notify you of anything. This is not a problem with our server, it’s a problem with users who choose to keep DM’s closed instead of just reporting spam in your spam folder

[pulsar ruin]

If they're "sent a verbal warning by nimi" in DMs then that doesn't really solve the problem. And at least in my case, I was not asked by moderators in chat to stop anything.

Actually, I would be satisfied if you did consistently ping people in chat or otherwise let them know if they are supposed to get warned even if the warning wasn't sent via nimi.

But like I said, this would not be much development effort and would save you from needing to be consistent about it

But it seems like we prioritize the members of a server differently, so it is what it is.

[pliant helm]

It’s not a matter of how we “prioritize members”, but of how there’s no reason for us to put in any amount of extra effort for a small group of people who can’t be bothered to keep their DM’s open because the 5 seconds to close a scam Dm is too much for them. If you can’t just tolerate spam like the rest of us, we can just tolerate sending a nimi dm.