Hm.
I can understand it, but it has worked quite well for smaller channels.
I want to bring the following points into consideration:
- As people inevitably want to still implement things the way they have been, if this change doesn’t remove a certain undocumented endpoint, traffic to it will drastically increase, which comes itself with issues - but then again, it is an undocumented endpoint, so people must not complain what happens with it. If it gets removed, a potentially official replacement Endpoint would be really handy. nudge nudge wink wink
- If people change implementations, it will end up meaning lurkers will have to end up being “less appreciated” because whatever integration may have been set up to deliver features that includes lurkers won’t be able to fetch them anymore.
- If 2) holds true, it may encourage people to spam more in chat when they are aware that their viewership only counts when they are posting something in chat. Noone likes spam.
- With the last change, a rolling window deployment was used and it was met with overall amazingly positive feedback. It would be VERY beneficial if such procedure was done for this change as well. If not, it would be great if some notice was sent in lieu of the “normal”
NAMESresponse so devs know what’s up. - It’s very understandable (in my opinion) that you don’t want incomplete/inconsistent functionality. I’m increasingly curious as to why the list behaves as it currently still does. Could we get some insight into it? It’s probably interesting.
Disclaimer: This is mostly my opinion and the direct impact i see for my application. Feel free to share other opinions!