Edit history
Earlier versions of Knock to join room permission, newest first.
Current version | Edited by Rex
Changes
Adding a join method where someone can "close the door", this makes it so anyone else that wants to join has to first "knock" and get someone inside to "let them in". I think this feature goes well with [#1094](https://feedback.fluxer.com/p/1094) and [#1082](https://feedback.fluxer.com/p/1082).Removed: ### Notes (optional)Removed: Removed: _No response_Removed: Removed: ### ChecksRemoved: Removed: - ☑ I searched for existing discussions and didn't find a duplicate.Removed:
Show
Knock to join room permission
Edited by Rex
Changes
### Proposed solutionRemoved: Adding a join method where someone can "close the door", this makes it so anyone else that wants to join has to first "knock" and get someone inside to "let them in". I think this feature goes well with [#706](https://feedback.fluxer.com/p/1094) and [#665](https://feedback.fluxer.com/p/1082).Added: Adding a join method where someone can "close the door", this makes it so anyone else that wants to join has to first "knock" and get someone inside to "let them in". I think this feature goes well with [#1094](https://feedback.fluxer.com/p/1094) and [#1082](https://feedback.fluxer.com/p/1082).### Notes (optional)
Show
Knock to join room permission
Problem
Open voice rooms in a large Community can get crowded really fast.Proposed solution
Adding a join method where someone can "close the door", this makes it so anyone else that wants to join has to first "knock" and get someone inside to "let them in". I think this feature goes well with #1094 and #1082.Notes (optional)
No responseChecks
- ☑ I searched for existing discussions and didn't find a duplicate.
Original by Rex
Show
Knock to join room permission
Problem
Open voice rooms in a large Community can get crowded really fast.Proposed solution
Adding a join method where someone can "close the door", this makes it so anyone else that wants to join has to first "knock" and get someone inside to "let them in". I think this feature goes well with #706 and #665.Notes (optional)
No responseChecks
- ☑ I searched for existing discussions and didn't find a duplicate.