This channel thingy would work way more directly though. It could be more instant, you just type into the chat and you send, and the channel users are going to see the message instantly. Personally I use imbox for longer and more serious messages. The channel system reminds me to, for example, fps team communication.

Yes, inbox is more for tournaments, or just in general longer messages. To be perfectly honest, I have used group inbox only for tournaments, and even in there it is almost useless with such a low number of participants. If I remember right it was 5 or something like that.

you can share an in-box with up to 6 people. Would have been nice for more when I with Krrish and Mayank did the predictions league but not worth asking for more just for a single event that takes place every 2 years.

People would still use free tables to listen to audio/music as I guess these channels don't have a facility to play music. Although you can stream music when playing a game or chatting.

I guess that a lot more text would pass through more people in thePR and if i am in 6 different groups for example any of those people could still send me messages while I am at a table. If I sent a message report for example because of an issue with a person the helpers would receive a report with table texts, PMs and the new chat channels if I am correct. This could be a lot of work for a helper, also, how would helpers be able to determine who sent what message from what group? It may be listed as FOOTBALL GROUP for example but the helpers would need to know who is in what group and what other groups they are in if they had to take any action against them.

Aminiel and his admin do need to take time with this and people need to respect that.

Um, that's why in your report you clearly mark what to look for. For example, at a free table with X, Y and Z, Y insulted X and Z shared some illegal material. That being said, I don't imagine myself joining 6 or 7 different channels, 2 or 3 at most.

Yes people should give a clue but not always. You don't catch all messages and with so many it can unknowingly sho other ones. Lets say you are in a Joke's group and a Helper sees some racist jokes in your report sent by over 18s but one of the members is under 18 and the helpers know they are say 15. These are a few examples of what may or may not happen.

Other issues is can you sstop group chats when in a game?
could it be possible to receive all chats as one big email at the end of the day, just in case you miss messages?

There are 3 kinds of troublemakers.

1. Ones that just look to cause trouble.
2. Those that won't cause trouble but if there is trouble will join in.
3. those that will only join in if something is said about them or to them that they don't like.

Still a lot for Aminiel to think about, it is naive to think that just allowing acounts for 6 months or over to use this system will solve many of the problems. You could even go further and say those that have caused trouble in the past won't be part of this system but some would say that is unfair and this is why Aminiel and his team need time to work everything out.

You can't give on the one han and take away with the other so when/if it is going to happen it has to be done properly and not for a few individuals needs who only think about themselves, remember it will have to apply to the whole of the PR.

No, as i said I do agree that gossip, shout etc are impractical on playroom, and personally i don't find it fun either.
What about this? a certain person creates a channel and asigns a password to it. The channel gets deleted unless there are 3 members in it within 24 hours of the creation.
The question is, if you are typing a password to join a channel, does it still require moderation? it becomes like moderating a free table.

If you create a channel and it is temporary I.e. it lasts while the group are in the PR and dissolves after everybody has left then good.

That can be an option too. but I dont see what is wrong even in a permanent channel.
If a person joins a channel then he joins with his own risk, just as we do in private tables.
If we get spammed in a private table then is it not our rsponsibility not to join that table in the future?

Hey peeps, what about stating that the channels are going to be joined with no admins and helpers responsibility of what is going to be said in them on the play room's website? It's true that you can't always catch up everything harmful being said, but this is the case even in free tables. I think that this could solve this problem.

You can't have one rule for one part of the PR and another rule for another part although I do understand your point.

Then apply it everywhere? If there's not enough people for a helper team to monitor PR 24/7/365, you can not guarantee no spam, no insults, no 18+ content being shown to less than 18 users, ETC.

There is enough people but not the will. You can easily split some of the powers of the helpers one example would be to create a team that just monitors the forum. I have said enough about Helpers in the past and can see why Nikola has become disenfranchised with the system in his other post. One example in the add for the original helpers job is that it says you must be regularly connected and some of the listed helpers for the English part have not been regularly connected as you know. Ok it may be a good reason why they are not working here but they have not been replaced. They could have been replaced and given their role back when they are able to return to the PR. Nobody this way loses their status.

I think helpers getting into individual problems with PR users is not a good thing in general. I mean, it's okay if somebody feels harmed and sends a history report, or uses the function talk to operators. But we have seen a case where the helper was getting into individual conversations, even if they did not harm anyone. That's why I think the channels shall be free for anyone to say anything as long as it does not harm anyone. There would be always a leave option, and always one can contact helpers and ask for help. But if helpers don't monitor conversations and statuses by their own, then there's no problem with channels either. What about this?

again, as i said, if you enter a password and join a channel then the moderators are in no way responsible for what you encounter.
just like a private free table maybe sending a log can be an option in extreme situations.

Yeah, so either the channels are private, so that they can be joined only upon an invitation, or they are publicly viewed and password protected. In any case, my opinion is that helpers shall be there per an ask for help by the user, so they don't have to monitor conversations either way.