In the chat, messages can be starred by clicking the little star icon to the right of each message. The tooltip for this star is "star this message as useful / interest for the transcript." Messages thus starred appear in the right panel of the chat room UI, beneath the room and user information sections, sorted by some combination of the number of stars, message timestamp, and whether or not the star was a regular-user star or a room-owner's "pin" type of star.

Recently, I've noticed a significant increase in the number of starred messages that have little or no value to the room as a whole or to its transcript. In my opinion, one should only star a message that is broadly applicable to the topical interest of the chat room. For example, this message, this message, or this one.

Conversely, messages like this, or this, or this or this are messages that have little or no topical value whatsoever. Or they don't mean much taken out of context. Here is the full list of stars in our chat.

It's my opinion that stars (because they are public) should be reserved for broadly-applicable, topical messages about games, game development, or software in general. Not generic fluff, links to internet meme images, or music videos. If you want to save an interesting message for your own use, that's what a bookmark to the message permalink is for.

Note that I'm not opposed to the messages themselves; I'm not advocating that our chat become a straight-laced police state where only on-topic discussion is permissible. I quite like the mix of casual banter and serious conversation we have. I am opposed to spamming stars on every single message that is remotely amusing or funny in the context of the current conversation, and thus plastering our starred message panel with what I perceive to be junk that is detrimental to the view of the community.

(As a callback to one of the election discussions, I've been thinking that a possible approach to getting more experience professional developers on this site would be to actually introduce them to the chat first, since the more subjective, general discussion-oriented nature might allow them to talk in a fashion that did not stress them so much about violating NDAs. But I don't think having the star panel filled with silliness sets a great first impression of the room.)

So, per a discussion in chat earlier today, I'd like to get the thoughts of the rest of the community on this particular subject? The consensus on MSO seems to be that since high-starred posts push low-starred posts off, the problem will be corrected via community moderation, but that doesn't appear to be the case given our relatively low chat population (or my opinion is in the minority).

In the chat, messages can be starred by clicking the little star icon to the right of each message. The tooltip for this star is "star this message as useful / interest for the transcript." Messages thus starred appear in the right panel of the chat room UI, beneath the room and user information sections, sorted by some combination of the number of stars, message timestamp, and whether or not the star was a regular-user star or a room-owner's "pin" type of star.

Recently, I've noticed a significant increase in the number of starred messages that have little or no value to the room as a whole or to its transcript. In my opinion, one should only star a message that is broadly applicable to the topical interest of the chat room. For example, this message, this message, or this one.

Conversely, messages like this, or this, or this or this are messages that have little or no topical value whatsoever. Or they don't mean much taken out of context. Here is the full list of stars in our chat.

So, per a discussion in chat earlier today, I'd like to get the thoughts of the rest of the community on this particular subject? The consensus on MSO seems to be that since high-starred posts push low-starred posts off, the problem will be corrected via community moderation, but that doesn't appear to be the case given our relatively low chat population (or my opinion is in the minority).

In the chat, messages can be starred by clicking the little star icon to the right of each message. The tooltip for this star is "star this message as useful / interest for the transcript." Messages thus starred appear in the right panel of the chat room UI, beneath the room and user information sections, sorted by some combination of the number of stars, message timestamp, and whether or not the star was a regular-user star or a room-owner's "pin" type of star.

Recently, I've noticed a significant increase in the number of starred messages that have little or no value to the room as a whole or to its transcript. In my opinion, one should only star a message that is broadly applicable to the topical interest of the chat room. For example, this message, this message, or this one.

Conversely, messages like this, or this, or this or this are messages that have little or no topical value whatsoever. Or they don't mean much taken out of context. Here is the full list of stars in our chat.

It's my opinion that stars (because they are public) should be reserved for broadly-applicable, topical messages about games, game development, or software in general. Not generic fluff, links to internet meme images, or music videos. If you want to save an interesting message for your own use, that's what a bookmark to the message permalink is for.

Note that I'm not opposed to the messages themselves; I'm not advocating that our chat become a straight-laced police state where only on-topic discussion is permissible. I quite like the mix of casual banter and serious conversation we have. I am opposed to spamming stars on every single message that is remotely amusing or funny in the context of the current conversation, and thus plastering our starred message panel with what I perceive to be junk that is detrimental to the view of the community.

(As a callback to one of the election discussions, I've been thinking that a possible approach to getting more experience professional developers on this site would be to actually introduce them to the chat first, since the more subjective, general discussion-oriented nature might allow them to talk in a fashion that did not stress them so much about violating NDAs. But I don't think having the star panel filled with silliness sets a great first impression of the room.)

So, per a discussion in chat earlier today, I'd like to get the thoughts of the rest of the community on this particular subject? The consensus on MSO seems to be that since high-starred posts push low-starred posts off, the problem will be corrected via community moderation, but that doesn't appear to be the case given our relatively low chat population (or my opinion is in the minority).

In the chat, messages can be starred by clicking the little star icon to the right of each message. The tooltip for this star is "star this message as useful / interest for the transcript." Messages thus starred appear in the right panel of the chat room UI, beneath the room and user information sections, sorted by some combination of the number of stars, message timestamp, and whether or not the star was a regular-user star or a room-owner's "pin" type of star.

Recently, I've noticed a significant increase in the number of starred messages that have little or no value to the room as a whole or to its transcript. In my opinion, one should only star a message that is broadly applicable to the topical interest of the chat room. For example, this message, this message, or this one.

Conversely, messages like this, or this, or this or this are messages that have little or no topical value whatsoever. Or they don't mean much taken out of context. Here is the full list of stars in our chat.

It's my opinion that stars (because they are public) should be reserved for broadly-applicable, topical messages about games, game development, or software in general. Not generic fluff, links to internet meme images, or music videos. If you want to save an interesting message for your own use, that's what a bookmark to the message permalink is for.

Note that I'm not opposed to the messages themselves; I'm not advocating that our chat become a straight-laced police state where only on-topic discussion is permissible. I quite like the mix of casual banter and serious conversation we have. I am opposed to spamming stars on every single message that is remotely amusing or funny in the context of the current conversation, and thus plastering our starred message panel with what I perceive to be junk that is detrimental to the view of the community.

(As a callback to one of the election discussions, I've been thinking that a possible approach to getting more experience professional developers on this site would be to actually introduce them to the chat first, since the more subjective, general discussion-oriented nature might allow them to talk in a fashion that did not stress them so much about violating NDAs. But I don't think having the star panel filled with silliness sets a great first impression of the room.)

So, per a discussion in chat earlier today, I'd like to get the thoughts of the rest of the community on this particular subject? The consensus on MSO seems to be that since high-starred posts push low-starred posts off, the problem will be corrected via community moderation, but that doesn't appear to be the case given our relatively low chat population (or my opinion is in the minority).