You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Pinging requires the person to be in the server. Doing <@123456789123456789> with the user ID does result in a "ping" but the bot spits out an error message in this case
[ERROR:bot] Exception in on_message
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/root/MusicBot/musicbot/bot.py", line 6869, in on_message
response = await handler(**handler_kwargs)
File "/root/MusicBot/musicbot/bot.py", line 2691, in cmd_blockuser
if option in ["+", "add"] and self.config.user_blocklist.is_blocked(user):
File "/root/MusicBot/musicbot/config.py", line 1974, in is_blocked
user_id = str(user.id)
AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'id'
I haven't tested if this error persists if you do the <@id> trick in a channel that a user does not have access to, but they're a member of the server otherwise.
It would be nice if we were able to do this without pinging people. Either with just usernames (e.g. !blockuser + user_name123) or user IDs (!blockuser + 123456789123456789).
Not to mention, not pinging people is far less confrontational.
I will also say it would be nice if there was a way for certain users (with perms) to check the block list. Currently there's no way for a non-host user to know what the block list looks like.
At the very least it would be cool if doing !blockuser [user] (without +/-) would tell if you that user was blocked or not.
Which of these categories fit your request?
None
Just checking...
I have confirmed that my feature has not already been requested.
I have confirmed that my feature has not already been implemented in the review branch.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I like this, and have added the planned label :) thanks for the request! You should be able to do it in a channel the user doesn't have read access to without pinging them. Also worth mentioning that there is a lot of planned stuffed coming to the dev branch here soon. I'm not sure if this in there already but we'll take a look and if it's not this will be added!
What new feature would you like to see?
Pinging requires the person to be in the server. Doing
<@123456789123456789>
with the user ID does result in a "ping" but the bot spits out an error message in this caseI haven't tested if this error persists if you do the
<@id>
trick in a channel that a user does not have access to, but they're a member of the server otherwise.It would be nice if we were able to do this without pinging people. Either with just usernames (e.g.
!blockuser + user_name123
) or user IDs (!blockuser + 123456789123456789
).Not to mention, not pinging people is far less confrontational.
I will also say it would be nice if there was a way for certain users (with perms) to check the block list. Currently there's no way for a non-host user to know what the block list looks like.
At the very least it would be cool if doing
!blockuser [user]
(without +/-) would tell if you that user was blocked or not.Which of these categories fit your request?
None
Just checking...
review
branch.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: