Status Messages Vs Personal Messages

Mark Doliner mark at
Thu Sep 11 17:49:16 EDT 2008

On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 2:47 PM, Ankit Singla <anksingla at> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 2:39 PM, Mark Doliner <mark at> wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Felipe Contreras
>> <felipe.contreras at> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 12:09 AM, Mark Doliner <mark at> wrote:
>>>> 2008/9/11 Sean Egan <seanegan at>:
>>>>> 2008/9/11 Kevin Stange <kevin at>
>>>>>> We accept that this is a valid use case based upon how users use status
>>>>>> messages.
>>>>> I think it's the only valid use case. I've never understood why it was
>>>>> changed in the first place (or why it's an option now). Looking through my
>>>>> buddy list, I don't see a single status message that would suddenly become
>>>>> entirely irrelevant if the person went from Away to Available or to Away or
>>>>> whatever.
>>>> I'm in favor of getting rid of the preference and having the message
>>>> remain unchanged when the status is changed.
>>> I agree.
>>> So the "status message" would not change when the status changes; what
>>> is statusy about it now? Would people need to click the status control
>>> to change it?
>> There really isn't that big of a difference... it's "statusy" because
>> it's right freaking next to the status box.  And no, you don't need to
>> click the status control to change, you just need to click in the text
>> box then start typing.
> Well, I think you'd have to know why it was changed to erasing the
> message on status change in the first place to decide if there needs
> to be a preference. Does anyone remember? I distinctly remember a time
> when changing the status didn't erase the message.

I think it was changed because some users found it inconvenient when
they set their status to "Available" but their message still said "I'm
out to lunch."  But I agree with KHC that it's a minor inconvenience.


More information about the Devel mailing list