Investor confidence is certainly something the company directors must always consider when making decisions, but typically that would be high level decisions. I find it very hard to believe that investor confidence is a driving force behind the decision not to implement a squelch toggle.
5 Likes
You find every reason against auto-squelch hard to believe and yet it’s still not implemented, so there must be reasons. Even if they state those reasons, you have admitted you will argue against them. So they ignore you and rightly so. Why try to reason with the unreasonable?
You’ve turned a QoL request into a pestering farce and you wonder why they ignore you while implementing other QoL changes?
3 Likes
I agree. Which is where I think you and I are talking past each other. You seem to think, and frankly I don’t blame you, that it’s developers that you need to convince. They did after all give some reasons why they don’t. However, like yourself, I don’t believe those answers were even remotely worthy of not implementing it.
I absolutely believe it’s the CEO or as you put it “high level” decision makers saying “no”. I can’t say why they are saying no, but I absolutely believe that it’s higher level than the Devs doing it.
I find it hard to believe that it’s not.
No. I find it hard to believe that fear of investors possibly thinking auto-squelch will turn hearthstone into a single player game is a driving force behind the decision not to implement this feature. Stop making things up about what I think.
Yes. If I disagree that those reasons are strong enough to not implement auto-squelch then I will make my case and counter those arguments in the hope that I will persuade them to change their minds.
So you think their failure to implement auto-squelch is because the developers are annoyed that I’m arguing passionately for the feature? I find that absurd.
2 Likes
I need Auto Squelch option.
3 Likes
I want squelch to work like every other setting in the game. If I turn it on it should stay on until I turn it off. I don’t have to turn my music off every game. I don’t have to put Hearthstone into full screen every game. I don’t have to change my resolution or volume or any other setting every game. Why should squelch be different than every other setting in Hearthstone?
3 Likes
Squelch is a feature. Not a setting.
Should they add: Automatically add previous opponent as friend? Because Im tired of doing it manually?
Only if emoting deactivates it. I greet everyone and only squelch the most obnoxious emoters, so the current squelch feature works perfectly fine for me. So if you want the current feature made permanent I want emoting to deactivate squelch to maintain its current use for those like me.
I have no problem with this. Actually I like this idea. It as it reduces the possibility that someone leaves squelch on accidentally and makes turning squelch off simple and easy. I imagine most people who want to emote would also want to receive emotes.
1 Like
How do you figure? A setting is something you set, like volume, resolution, or music on/off. Adding friends, importing decks, enhanced search are features. Which does squelch more closely match?
You can argue that every setting is a feature, after all they did not have to include a volume slider or different screen resolutions, but that undermines the feature vs setting argument.
A feature. Which is why I said it.
My opponents behavior has no influence on my volume or brightness.
Squelch is a feature provided to stop the abuse of the emote feature.
Emotes are also features of the game. A variable enacted by choice within the individual match.
Theoretically you could play dozens and dozens of games without ever seeing an emote activated by your opponent.
Why add a setting to shut off something that isn’t persistent?
What are we shutting off? A potential occurance of an in game action that already has a manual fail safe?
Not to say making a manual function automatic wouldnt be more convenient for those times when you get huge strings of annoying emotes. But you cant guarantee that string.
Tldr dont try to sell the feature by fabricating some “bogey man” as a scare tactic to weigh the cause to your end and then compare it to the music or volume or another setting.
Whats next? Pls add a button to turn off my opponents golden portrait because I feel its bragging and I want the whole world to be equal and I suck so no one can has shiney things if I cant too?
1 Like
You think the devs aren’t putting in autosquelch because of what one guys posts? What planet are you living on?
2 Likes
Are you sending friend requests after every match?
That’s a pretty reasonable request. Although it really has nothing to do with auto-squelch. You suggestion would apply to squelch in it’s current implementation. But it’s a suggestion that should be presented in it’s own thread, not this one. And if you do create a thread for it, I would support your suggestion.
1 Like
I was responding to the request that the current squelch feature be changed to be permanent, that makes it relevant to this thread.
I get that. But what you are suggesting applies generally to squelch, not necessarily auto-squelch.
Your suggestion is a good one, mainly because it would actually solve the problem of people accidentally setting auto-squelch and forgetting it. An alternate solution would be that you cannot emote while your opponent is squelched (regardless of how the squelch was applied).
Now, all that being said, why do you think emotes should result in automatically unsquelching the opponent? Keep in mind, the opponent has no idea if he’s squelched or not.
edit for mis quoting
2 Likes
Because by emoting you agree to communicate with your opponent. Communicating involves both speaking and listening. People who don’t want to hear emotes shouldn’t be emoting in the first place - practice what you preach sorta thing.
E: same goes for AS, it should disable all emotes both incoming and outgoing.
I do? Really? Where is that written? What if someone merely wants to see the funny comments?
That said, I don’t emote, so this suggestion wouldn’t really affect me. But I’m still not seeing the why part to your argument.
People who don’t want to see emotes shouldn’t be emoting. I know that’s your position. But why? Perhaps if a person squelches their opponent, they become squelched themselves? So rather than not being able to press the emote button, they just don’t broadcast it. How would that feel to you? Wouldn’t that effectively get the same result?
2 Likes
Absolutely. Anyone who emotes opens the communication corridor. Its pretty hypocritical to want the ability to permanently disable your opponents communication attempts while retaining your ability for a sneaky BM emote when you top deck lethal dont you think? Sorry, you surrender that privilege the second you decide you want to stick your fingers in your ears permanently.
Its really a simple concept based on principle. You dont want to see your opponents emotes, fine, surrender your emoting privilege at the same time or use manual squelch.
Your whole post is full of hypocrisy. If you can give me one GOOD reason why those using a hypothetical AS feature should retain their ability to emote I may reconsider, but there isn’t one. You dont want to communicate, then DONT.
3 Likes
I hope you’re joking. “But BMers would be so lonely!”
What a disgusting position to take.
1 Like
It’s an example, stop micro analyzing. But since you brought it up. What if I was? Do you find it outrageous that I might feel the NEED TO? Because you well know I feel it’s outrageous you feel the NEED TO squelch every match “just in case”, but I respect your decision to.