Create option to only let Team Owners schedule meetings in a Teams Channel.
For really large (or Public) Teams it isn't ideal to let any member schedule a meeting in a Teams channel and automatically invite the whole Team to it. It would be great if there was a configuration setting that owners could restrict scheduling meetings in channels to only owners.

35 comments
-
Anonymous commented
I 100% support this!!!
-
James commented
Support this and further to what Ricky Spitz mentioned, all meeting invites (large or small team) should have invites sent with the distribution list in the bcc field so that reply-all email flurries cannot happen.
-
NG commented
Support this suggestion.
-
Anonymous commented
Agree
-
Tammy Correa commented
I support this and would like this to be an option when an owner sets up Team Channels.
-
Joe Kalinosky commented
I fully support Jenna's concept.
-
Anonymous commented
Please please create this an as option
-
Steven Todaro commented
yes, please
-
Ricky Spitz commented
Voted for this but wonder if a better solution to yesterday's would be a more robust warning in Outlook before sending a 'reply all' to this many recipients.
-
Anonymous commented
This is a very good Idea!
-
Anonymous commented
I fully support this initiative.
-
Chris Baughurst commented
Restricting the scheduling of a team invite to only Owners would be a great idea.
-
Giles Hine commented
This is definitely a requirement. Users seem unable to prevent themselves replying to all
-
Anonymous commented
Agreed - good idea
-
Mohamed Ameer Ibrahim A P commented
Yes, agreed. Experienced the negative impact of not having this option yesterday.
-
Anonymous commented
If the problem is inviting the whole team to the meeting, it seems like a more direct solution would be: have scheduler select a notification option of team/channel/none.
If the problem is messaging the whole team in general, then a setting to restrict users ability to broadcast to whole team seems like the best match. -
John M. Mullen commented
This is a great idea to allow configuration to restrict a potentially VERY disruptive error by regular users (like me).
-
Anonymous commented
agreed
-
Anonymous commented
I support this
-
Steve Whitcomb commented
This seems a very reasonable control for a very real problem.