-32

Effective today, January 29, 2026, all users on Stack Exchange can now participate in public chat rooms, regardless of reputation. Formerly, users with less than 20 reputation were only able to access the Stack Exchange Lobby, via the Chat links on the left sidebar and in the top right menu. Now those navigation links lead to the site’s chat landing page, just as they do for users with more than 20 reputation.

We spent much of 2025 working to update the chat experience on the network, implementing many improvements requested by the community over the years. Some changes were focused on design and user experience, while others were more “under the hood” and focused on stability and sustainability.

We’re aiming for community growth as a return on that investment. This is not about adding characters and junk content to increase contribution metrics. We want deeper human interaction in the increasingly AI-saturated world, more collaboration and problem solving, and new and more diverse voices. We feel confident that this is a shared goal with the existing community. Indeed, many of you have spoken about how you took your first steps on Stack Exchange by participating in chat.

Less-structured and real-time conversational spaces are where bonds can be forged and communities can be built. In this time of slower Q&A activity and more places for quick answers, earning 20 rep in order to enter chat is a taller order – so we’re seeing how it goes if we remove that barrier.

We made this change on Stack Overflow earlier in January.

What we’ve seen on Stack Overflow since then:

  • Reduced activity in the Lobby chat room

  • New chat users sending “hello” messages and similar greetings

  • New chat users asking on-topic general & beginner types of questions

  • Unclear messages and “code dumps” from new chat users that result in either follow-up questions or message removal

  • Overall, a modest increase in activity from users with less than 20 reputation

In general, we expect to see the same happening on Stack Exchange: new chat users exploring what’s available and taking their first steps.

What we have not seen on Stack Overflow:

  • Large numbers of chaotic messages and nonsensical posts

  • A surge in spam posts and activity by bad actors

  • A large increase in message deletions (or forms of soft deletion)

The lack of large-scale problems helped us determine that this is a safe enough change to make on Stack Exchange as well. We do hope to see a bigger increase in participation, which may happen gradually over time. We’re monitoring activity, and Community Managers are using new tooling to review messages from lower-rep users for problematic content.

If problems emerge, we’ll assess them case by case. And if persistent issues prove difficult to overcome, the reputation requirement can always be changed again. Let’s see how this experience rolls out and affects the environment of chat.

As noted in this recent post, the Community Management team will be working more closely and consistently with individual communities in the coming year. As CMs introduce themselves and kick off conversations about community development, chat may be a topic of discussion.

FAQ

What can room owners do to manage increased activity in chat rooms?

Room owners and moderators can set up room guidelines using the new functionality. Some users will read them, and others won’t, but having guidelines established shows that there are expectations and something to justify revoking room privileges if a user does not follow them. Additionally, consider updating a chat room’s description to clearly state what the room is about and the type of conversation that’s expected there. This up-front clarity can help protect the culture that the community has already established for that space.

Room owners now have the option to ban specific users from a chat room for a set amount of time, up to 7 days. The kick-mute option is fully configurable now in that way. Users kicked from a room have that action noted on their chat profile, visible to site moderators who may be assessing user behavior across multiple rooms.

The Gallery configuration remains an option for room owners who wish to restrict access.

Why can’t individual sites decide on this?

Unlike some other privileges, we can only make this reputation threshold change at the chat database level; we can’t change this at the per-site level. Since most Stack Exchange network sites share a chat database, this change will be applied to the entire SE chat database (or “chat server” to use the more common term).

Will the Meta Stack Exchange chat database also have a lower reputation requirement?

No. But if there is interest in doing that, it’s an option.


Let us know about what opportunities you see with this change, what concerns you have, and how things are going.

For Stack Overflow, we established a Chat Room Owner Lounge specifically for room owners, aspiring room owners, site moderators, and staff to discuss chat room management. Should we establish a similar space for Stack Exchange chat?

If usage of the Stack Exchange Lobby declines, should we make efforts to keep the room active?

6
  • 13
    So ... your saying we can expect spam in chat now. Has anyone notified the smoke detector crew yet? Commented 2 days ago
  • 16
    @CaffeineAddiction (While I'm part of Charcoal, this isn't a statement on behalf of Charcoal) This MSE post was linked in Charcoal HQ, but SmokeDetector does not monitor for spam (or R/A) content in chat. Commented 2 days ago
  • 21
    "We want deeper human interaction in the increasingly AI-saturated world, more collaboration and problem solving, and new and more diverse voices." - this is a hilarious statement coming from y'all. It's too late to backpivot now. Commented 2 days ago
  • 3
    @Seggan that's subterfuge. It all makes sense if you realise that the only thing the company sees as sellable in the network at this point is training data (human-written text) for AI. Commented 2 days ago
  • 6
    "Let us know about what opportunities you see with this change, what concerns you have, and how things are going." - for starters starball said "I'd feel better about this if room owners could opt their rooms out of this in the room settings". Yet here we are, hearing that "we can only make this reputation threshold change at the chat database level"... doesn't feel like what we say actually matters... [cont] Commented yesterday
  • 16
    to quote Journeyman Geek "Right now, we have certain specific modes for rooms, things like gallery mode and private rooms. Part of the development for this should have been to add the lower rep level as a separate mode.", yet you opted for a quick and dirty solution that you could use to justify pushing this in everyone face. Again, don't tell us that our opinion matters. Commented yesterday

4 Answers 4

30

Generally when making a potentially breaking change - there ought to be an upside, and most of what's pointed out is.. bad but not that bad.

Unlike some other privileges, we can only make this reputation threshold change at the chat database level; we can’t change this at the per-site level. Since most Stack Exchange network sites share a chat database, this change will be applied to the entire SE chat database (or “chat server” to use the more common term).

Right now, we have certain specific modes for rooms, things like gallery mode and private rooms. Part of the development for this should have been to add the lower rep level as a separate mode.

This and other chat improvements might make for a valuable sprint.

I also don't really see some of the issues we'd brought up addressed. I'm currently assisting or am the available mod on about half a dozen main rooms. While we have a lot of mods, the previous design choices for chat means rooms are quiet, and a lot of moderators don't frequent their site rooms as much.

We've also seen the occasional chat spam in the lobby - and the tools for dealing with a larger spam wave aren't really there.

I'd love more quality chat activity but pushing forward with these changes without benefits outside 'there's slightly more people' doesn't make sense.

2
  • 7
    "Part of the development for this should have been to add the lower rep level as a separate mode." - Which somehow was possible for the Lobby and yet we ended up with "we can only make this reputation threshold change at the chat database level". Doesn't feel like your words - or starball's on the original SO thread - really means anything for them. Commented yesterday
  • 3
    At the very least, no one can say no one told them, right? Commented yesterday
13

I assume this notification (linking to https://chat.meta.stackexchange.com/) I got a while ago is due to this change:

You can now participate in all public chat rooms on Stack Exchange

You can now participate in all public chat rooms on Stack Exchange

Join Chat to instantly connect and talk with the community

If so, it doesn't make much sense. I could already talk all public rooms - I have enough rep on many SE sites, SO, and Meta SE to cover each chat. And linking specifically to https://chat.meta.stackexchange.com/ also doesn't make sense in the context of "all public chat rooms on Stack Exchange".

5
  • 1
    What site were you on when you looked this notification? Commented 2 days ago
  • 1
    Either Unix & Linux or Ask Ubuntu, not sure. Definitely not here on Meta SE. Commented 2 days ago
  • 2
    Thanks for pointing this out. This has been resolved now. Can you please check your inbox notification and confirm if the link is now pointing to chat.stackexchange.com? Commented 2 days ago
  • 4
    @CodeBender yes, now it does point to chat.stackexchange.com. Though that still doesn't make much sense to me since I could already chat there anyway. Commented 2 days ago
  • 7
    This (message appearing for users who could already chat) was a bug on SO when they rolled it out there, too. I'm guessing they didn't fix that before porting over to SE. Commented 2 days ago
10

What is the ETA for the CM escalation tool in Chat for Chat.SE? (It works in Chat.Meta.SE and Chat.SO.) When this went live on Stack Overflow we saw a significant initial increase in troll behaviour and underage users, presumably because of the announcement post(s) and trolls feed off each other. This did decrease after a week or two (fortunately), but I wouldn't be surprised we get another spike.

Unlike Chat.Meta.SE and Chat.SO, any moderator on any site can moderator Chat.SE, however, we can't do anything site mod wise unless we're a mod on a site that they belong to so, as an example, we can't escalate underage users (something that we are required to do as Moderators). I, admittedly, would have hoped that the CM Escalation tool would have been completed on Chat.SE before this went live.

2
  • 4
    This proved to be more challenging that expected for SE, since the mod messaging system requires the context and mod permissions on the specific site. We have a few ideas about how to approach this, but all require quite a bit of work. At this time there is no ETA on getting something in place for SE chat. Commented yesterday
  • 7
    @Berthold that's fair. It's not like the company had the freedom to postpone these rep changes until adequate tooling was ready to moderate the increase in moderation load that anyone could have foreseen. Commented yesterday
5

If usage of the Stack Exchange Lobby declines, should we make efforts to keep the room active?

I wanted to address this matter separately.

Firstly, the activity on the Stack Overflow Lobby has decreased dramatically once the other rooms have opened, after the initial troll spike I mention in my other answer. This does mean that it's a little sad to see that things are quieter, however, it's also nice to be able to have conversations with others like adults, and not be interrupted with random code/error dumps, non-English text, and users entering and demanding we write an entire application for them. The room has the same amount of "off-topic" content as the SE Lobby has had; which considering that the SO Lobby has a more defined scope (don't get me wrong it's still loosely defined), is a good thing.

I imagine that the same will happen in the SE Lobby, but this isn't a bad thing either. The SE Lobby has felt like a Water Cooler environment more or less since from the get go (or at least after the initial troubles). It's a nice place to drop into most of the time, and I don't think that value will be lost. It's a great place to drop in and talk to people from the other sites that you don't visit yourself, as it's shown on all the chat spaces (except SO.Chat and Chat.Meta.SE), and that's actually great.

So in short, no, I don't think the SE Lobby will go; that lobby, in my opinion, has been a success. SO Lobby, not so much, but it actually feels like it might be getting there now, but it's too soon to tell.

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.