# Staff should be exempt from user mention limit

**URL:** <https://meta.discourse.org/t/staff-should-be-exempt-from-user-mention-limit/21416>\
**Category:** Feature\
**Created:** [22 Ottobre 2014, 3:04pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/staff-should-be-exempt-from-user-mention-limit/21416 "2014-10-22T15:04:15Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 15

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Stefan\_Fairphone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/stefan_fairphone/32/119580_2.png) [@Stefan\_Fairphone](https://meta.discourse.org/u/Stefan_Fairphone)\
**Post date:** [27 Gennaio 2016, 2:28am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/staff-should-be-exempt-from-user-mention-limit/21416/15 "2016-01-27T02:28:31Z")

</div>

> [@sam](#):
>
> Is there a reason group mentions are not being used here, seems like a better fit.

I would need at least 3 groups then:

@going\_to\_amsterdam\_but\_doesnt\_need\_accomodation  
@unsure\_whether\_going\_to\_amsterdam  
@going\_to\_amsterdam\_and\_needs\_accomodation

Plus: As @jomaxro says, I’d need to ask my admin to create these groups (and to add users, if I get new info from people).

PS.: There is another argument: The information, who is going, and who is not, is only relevant for the people, who have been added to the PM. A group on the other hand is public (and, btw., creates far too much overhead for the simple task of listing multiple user names).

---

_[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/staff-should-be-exempt-from-user-mention-limit/21416)._