Give every user a default group tag (example users)

Hi Everyone,

I am buzzy with deep diving into Discourse (just run one on Vultr :slight_smile: ). After one of my questions about group tagging Group tagging notification (allow groups to be tagged).

Now I was wondering if it is possible to give all users a group tag by default (without manual work ;)). So every user can tag all users.

This allows administrators, for example, to force users to receive a notification for a certain post (of course this is only useful for internal use :slight_smile: .

Tagging users? Tags don’t work that way, or isn’t ment to use that way. You would have awful lot tags then. Do you mean mentions?

And if you want wake up all users using tags or mentions is just impossible.

Did you mean to mention @trust_level_0 ?


That doesn’t reach everyone, AFAIK. I can mix that with @here, though. There is max users notified per group mention setting, but I don’t know can it be like infinite or ridiculous big.

Well I want to be able to mention @all for example. And that would reach all users on the platform. When renaming @trust_level_0 (group) to @all and tag them in a message, all the users would get a notification?

When someone gets a higher trust level, will this user also be disconnected from the @trust_level_0 group?

No. Everyone is there.

That is different story if TL1 would be better choise, meaning everyone better than TL0.

You can increase it to 2000000000

1 Like

The only problem is that you cannot rename the trust_level_group_0 Is it possible to rename the trust_level_0 group to something else?.

But you can set up a hook in discourse that pings an endpoint, which in turn tells the discourse api to add a user to a group, on sign up.

Not pretty but it would work :okay:

No. Create a group and add people. Then they can mention @group.

Do not rename default groups. It’ll be confusing (if it will let you).

1 Like

You can rename default groups through admin/customize/site_texts :+1: To change trust level 0 it would be groups.default_names.trust_level_0

It can’t share a name with an existing user or group, or the rename will not take. The change takes place as part of a background job, so will be updated when that runs. You can speed it along by triggering Jobs::EnsureDbConsistency from the /sidekiq/scheduler

I was wondering why it took so long to update (was testing it out). But when you change the name of the group, would it be possible to mention it by @newGroupname?

If you change the name through admin/customize/site_texts it should also travel through to menu dropdowns and @mentions, etc :+1:

Actually, I’m not sure I’ve tested an @mention. Let me just go check…

I’ve checked, and it does. :+1:

1 Like

You can rename it. It will just be confusing to anyone who’s familiar with discourse and tries to help out later. It’s likely to cause more problems than it solves, but I don’t know that community, just a few hundreds that I’ve helped out here. I could be wrong.


The reason I ask this is if you use, for example, an authentication layer from Google (oauth2), you cannot assign a member to a certain group by hand every time, so whether you:

  • Must change the default group name
  • Triggering a webhook with a (PHP) script that creates a callback, adding the user to that group.

I don’t think it’s that confusing? As long as they mention they’ve renamed it if it’s relevant it seems pretty straightforward. I think a few people have done it that I know of and I don’t think they’ve reported any issues? (bar the group/username conflict that causes the rename to silently fail).

Is there any other reason you would recommend to avoid it?

1 Like

Trust level is used in a zillion places. If trust_level_0 is called “not_trust_level” and you go to start debugging some issue with trust levels, you’re likely to be confused. “Wait. There is no trust_level_0. How does this even work!?” you might say.

1 Like

I’ve been using custom names for trust levels with no issues outside of the aforementioned conflict between an existing username and the new group name (resolved here Trust_level default name?) Isn’t the whole point of the custom text section on the admin menu so that you only have to make one change to alter the zillion places in the UI the text is used?

Based on my experience, changing the name of the trust level is an easy way to give your forum a more coherent theme and is just more fun.

Trainer > Ace > Leader is a lot more meaningful, on brand and fun for my community than trust_level_1 > trust_level_2 > trust_level_3


Glad it’s working for you! Maybe I’m just too rigid.

My point was that there are many strings to customize that talk about trust levels. But if you’ve not had trouble then that’s real data and I don’t have any specific examples (that I remember) of it being an actual problem, so it’s likely safe to ignore me.

1 Like

A warning: TL0 includes stages users. If you use stages users and send a message to that group, staged users will be emailed.

This has surprised a few people. :slight_smile:


What do you mean with staged users?