I disagree with Marc Marc and Jeff Jeff here.
I have always compared @-mentions to shouting someone's name at a party – everyone hears it, anyone who thinks what they heard is close enough to their name turns around, and if there are two Simons in the room, they'll figure out who was meant.
I'd rather err on the side of notifying one person too much than forgetting one recipient.
I'm not saying there isn't room for improvements here and there, but neither Aarobot's solution (which works in comments where you easily see the 1–4 potential recipients, but already gets weird in chat when you have to define "active") nor Jeff's idea (prioritizing based on a deduced semantic property of the username) gets me excited.
Now, I sympathize with your (marcog's) case (I see quite a few people refer to Marc Gravell as @marc), and I'm open to ideas. But so far, I don't see anything I like.
I disagree with Marc and Jeff here.
I have always compared @-mentions to shouting someone's name at a party – everyone hears it, anyone who thinks what they heard is close enough to their name turns around, and if there are two Simons in the room, they'll figure out who was meant.
I'd rather err on the side of notifying one person too much than forgetting one recipient.
I'm not saying there isn't room for improvements here and there, but neither Aarobot's solution (which works in comments where you easily see the 1–4 potential recipients, but already gets weird in chat when you have to define "active") nor Jeff's idea (prioritizing based on a deduced semantic property of the username) gets me excited.
Now, I sympathize with your (marcog's) case (I see quite a few people refer to Marc Gravell as @marc), and I'm open to ideas. But so far, I don't see anything I like.
I disagree with Marc and Jeff here.
I have always compared @-mentions to shouting someone's name at a party – everyone hears it, anyone who thinks what they heard is close enough to their name turns around, and if there are two Simons in the room, they'll figure out who was meant.
I'd rather err on the side of notifying one person too much than forgetting one recipient.
I'm not saying there isn't room for improvements here and there, but neither Aarobot's solution (which works in comments where you easily see the 1–4 potential recipients, but already gets weird in chat when you have to define "active") nor Jeff's idea (prioritizing based on a deduced semantic property of the username) gets me excited.
Now, I sympathize with your (marcog's) case (I see quite a few people refer to Marc Gravell as @marc), and I'm open to ideas. But so far, I don't see anything I like.
I disagree with Marc and Jeff here.
I have always compared @-mentions to shouting someone's name at a party –– everyone hears it, anyone who thinks what they heard is close enough to their name turns around, and if there are two Simons in the room, they'll figure out who was meant.
I'd rather err on the side of notifying one person too much than forgetting one recipient.
I'm not saying there isn't room for improvements here and there, but neither Aarobot's solution (which works in comments where you easily see the 1–41–4 potential recipients, but already gets weird in chat when you have to define "active""active") nor Jeff's idea (prioritizing based on a deduced semantic property of the username) gets me excited.
Now, I sympathize with your (marcog's) case (I see quite a few people refer to Marc Gravell as @marc), and I'm open to ideas. But so far, I don't see anything I like.
I disagree with Marc and Jeff here.
I have always compared @-mentions to shouting someone's name at a party – everyone hears it, anyone who thinks what they heard is close enough to their name turns around, and if there are two Simons in the room, they'll figure out who was meant.
I'd rather err on the side of notifying one person too much than forgetting one recipient.
I'm not saying there isn't room for improvements here and there, but neither Aarobot's solution (which works in comments where you easily see the 1–4 potential recipients, but already gets weird in chat when you have to define "active") nor Jeff's idea (prioritizing based on a deduced semantic property of the username) gets me excited.
Now, I sympathize with your (marcog's) case (I see quite a few people refer to Marc Gravell as @marc), and I'm open to ideas. But so far, I don't see anything I like.
I disagree with Marc and Jeff here.
I have always compared @-mentions to shouting someone's name at a party – everyone hears it, anyone who thinks what they heard is close enough to their name turns around, and if there are two Simons in the room, they'll figure out who was meant.
I'd rather err on the side of notifying one person too much than forgetting one recipient.
I'm not saying there isn't room for improvements here and there, but neither Aarobot's solution (which works in comments where you easily see the 1–4 potential recipients, but already gets weird in chat when you have to define "active") nor Jeff's idea (prioritizing based on a deduced semantic property of the username) gets me excited.
Now, I sympathize with your (marcog's) case (I see quite a few people refer to Marc Gravell as @marc), and I'm open to ideas. But so far, I don't see anything I like.