1  |   Order by index

May 2, 2004, 6:28pm

It has bugged me for some time that you cannot identify incoming whispers on
the browser chat log.

A simple addition (I would hope) to add (W) to the beginning of an incoming
whisper would help identify those.

Example: Mike: (W) this is getting boring
David: (to Mike) i agree
Mike: Hey everyone lets shake things upo
Mike: (W) lets see if that gets something going

This would identify whisper TO the logging person uniquely from open chat.
As it is now, even the person logging has to joggle memory and sometimes
guess.

Anyway, this is my wishlist item for the browser sometime soon.

Karten

May 2, 2004, 6:40pm

Yes I think this would be a very good addition. I have to deal with chat
logs often and it gets confusing when there is no indication of what is
a whisper or not!

Ryan
Citizen #323279

[View Quote]

May 2, 2004, 7:06pm

better

Mike (w): this is getting boring
David (w): (to Mike) i agree

so there is less possibility of cheating by adding the (W) to the
chat.

Alex

[View Quote] >It has bugged me for some time that you cannot identify incoming whispers on
>the browser chat log.
>
>A simple addition (I would hope) to add (W) to the beginning of an incoming
>whisper would help identify those.
>
>Example: Mike: (W) this is getting boring
> David: (to Mike) i agree
> Mike: Hey everyone lets shake things upo
> Mike: (W) lets see if that gets something going
>
>This would identify whisper TO the logging person uniquely from open chat.
>As it is now, even the person logging has to joggle memory and sometimes
>guess.
>
>Anyway, this is my wishlist item for the browser sometime soon.
>
>Karten
>

May 2, 2004, 7:07pm

Either that or having the option of not logging whispers in the first
place would be nice.

Builderz
http://www.3dhost.net

May 3, 2004, 1:05am

Either way would be good in my opinion, since chat.txt logs do not do
colors.

Now if AW was to go to RTF files for chat.logs might have something.

1  |   Order by index