Log in here to report bugs or suggest features. Please enter your phone number in the international format and we will send a confirmation message to your account via Telegram.
We've just sent you a message.
Please confirm access via Telegram
Like many have asked before (for different reasons) for years (even before we had this suggestions platform) and as you can see with other suggestions in this platform too:
https://bugs.telegram.org/c/1748
https://bugs.telegram.org/c/3417
https://bugs.telegram.org/c/10535
https://bugs.telegram.org/c/10533
There is a need by some people to be able to avoid private messages for non-contacts.
Why?: There are many reasons on why to add this feature.
As a social person i enjoy being inside Public Groups. It's amazing to be able to talk to other people from all around the world.
But it comes with a cost:
Users/Scammers/Spammers and Autommated Accouns that are (or not) inside public groups can annoy you in private.
For some unclear reason Telegram decided to just ignore the issue. They added a bunch of options that are not enough.
For example there is a hidden privacy option to Archive and Silence new Private Messages from non-contact users.
It's a step forward but this option only appears if you litterally get bombarded with hundreds of unknown users...
Most of the people that ask for a way to disable Private Messages from non-contacts are females.
Making that option hidden until some unknown conditional is reached feels like Telegram is embracing all those Creeps to allow them to annoy those females in private.
Not letting anyone decide if they want to (or not) receive private messages just kills the spirit of Public Groups for some minorities.
To be fair: We already asked and made noise with this topic back in 2016 or 2017... Probably no one will give a f*** about this.
Telegram Team lives in a bubble for years, they see things from another prespective as a New User that starts with Telegram, enters it's first masive Public Group and then it gets countless messages from bad people.
And don't take me wrong... More than 80% of people are really nice human beings... But in a group of 10K users even if just the 10% are the worst it's enough to drive you crazy with private messages from strangers.
Other suggestions:
https://bugs.telegram.org/c/3417
https://bugs.telegram.org/c/10548/15
https://bugs.telegram.org/c/10548/20
In my case, I have an army of bots that remove spam and scams using a variety of different methods, but that doesn't stop scammers from changing their tactics. When a network of scammers detect that there is an army of bots, and that army of bots is working, they simply join and DM people. Point is, group owners become aware of this very quickly and they have to start putting pinned announcements in their groups regularly to tell people it's a scam. Why should they have to do that? Would it not be easier to just have a switch in group settings to say "disallow members from seeing other member profiles", or "disallow members from messaging other members directly"? I know it can be tricky, because sometimes you want to allow it. But that’s what exception lists are for.
"For example there is a hidden privacy option to Archive and Silence new Private Messages from non-contact users.
It's a step forward but this option only appears if you litterally get bombarded with hundreds of unknown users..."
- Only Telegram could knows (maybe not even they know)
> But what has that to do with the suggestion?
If and how does that encryption take place if things are unique to each device?
> What encryption? What are you talking about? Who is talking about encryption?
That means there's an exchange of data taking place somewhere, no?
> What? exchange of data? What are we talking about? I really have no clue why you answer as if someone talked about another different thing...
I'm not savvy at all but something about an IP address seems to come to mind.
> What? IP address? what has that to do with the suggestion either way?
In case it wasn't clear enough: This suggestion is just to bring into attention that the final user should be the one that decides if he want or not being poked by strangers. At the end he is the one that suffers if he engages in many public groups.