Q u o t e: Because choosing to ignore your team mates in a co-op environment where other people may be trying to communicate important information kind of goes against the idea of co-op play. Besides, it doesn't just effect the person using it, it effects the whole party. What if your party needs to know you are not ready for someone to open a seal or click on the altar at the Arreat Summit etc? Well, someone is not going to get the message.
Unless they type in /o unigm before playing cooperative pubbies. And that is only assuming they cared enough to use /o igm in the first place, which isn't guaranteed, and is on them, either way, whether to enable it or disable it. You're extrapolating on what you think someone else might do (if they were clueless), and naysaying only because of that. You don't have to use /o igm. No one you play with has to use /o igm. In fact, you'll want to play with people who don't use /o igm, because, hey, they might forget to type in /o unigm, and what a horrible inconvenience that would be for you. None of this is a reason for saying the idea shouldn't be implemented for others.
Q u o t e: Any reason why you totally ignored the reasons I said using the /flist would be problematic? Because it was your solution to communication issues it is kind of important.
I guess because I see a failure of logic, and I'm mystified. You're projecting inconveniences that rely on several initial missteps and using that oblique problem to dismiss an easy fix that everyone (except spambots) wants. I call that obfuscation.
Q u o t e: I gave a few reasons why I thought it wasn't a good solution in the 2/3 of my post you did not comment on by pointing out the only work around you can use to get around the command and communicate with your party in a co-op environment was problematic.
That workaround would only apply to someone who wants to use the feature in a cooperative public game without turning it off. It's someone else's decision what to do in that situation, not yours or mine. I think that's the point you're missing. As it stands, no one has a choice. My solution offers everyone the freedom of choice. You've not cited one way in which the feature would definitively impact your gameplay experience or playstyle if you chose not to use it. Citing what you think (or in your mind are "sure") other people might (or in your mind, "will") do doesn't address the question. It's three steps removed from the issue, which is the right each individual should have to squelch in-game messages.
My thoughts are a work in progress, so please excuse the mental dust.