Full control over muted mic and camera of participants


Guys, is there no way to fully control participants in meet.jit videos? I know we can set the videoconference to start muted and focused on me, but, since we are in quarantine and many teachers are using the tool for classes, it is obviously impossible to control the class sometimes, as some students might fell inclined to disrupt classes (and there frequently is someone to do that).

Cant you guys give full power to the meeting admin to be the only person that can mute or unmute students? It would work great, specially with the “raise your hand” feature.

I guarantee you, there are millions of teachers in the world right now that want this feature out of jit. You could easily charge for this, even it a little.


Unmuting people has a big privacy concern and that’s why this had never been implemented, and I don’t see it coming.

1 Like

cant there be 2 mutes? admin muted and self muted? That way the videoconference moderator can remove admin muted only.

you could even make the admin mute activate the self mute, that way a person is not “tricked” into trusting the admin muted just to have it deactivated by the admin at random.

1 Like

Unmute is only possible by the participant itself, nobody should control that.
The moderator can ask hey Tom, can you say next and that guy Tom just unmutes itself and talks.

1 Like

it seems like maybe there is somehow confusion on the requested feature, because there does not need to be any privacy issue with a correct design.

the classroom seems like a clear and obvious use case, as mentioned by that Jitsi Meet would make a great replacement for known unfriendly proprietary solutions that are being actively promoted right now.

with just thinking about this example for at least 5 minutes, it seems like the typical chain of events would be something like:

host setup
1.creates password protected room to reduce uninvited guests.
2. setting of start with video and mic off.
3. setting of follow me (if it means always focus on what host is watching).
4. mute everyone menu item should enable the permission system.

permission representation
5. attendee mic shows a special icon to represent locked.
6. attempt to activate mic will use raise hand function to request permission.
7. mic icon shows special icon to represent waiting.

permission interaction
8a. host grants permission, attendee mic is unlocked (but still needs to be activated).
8a1. afterward, attendee mutes their own mic.
8a2. or host activates mute all again.
8b. or host denies permission.

9. attendee mic icon goes back to show locked restriction, hand lowered.

hope that helps.


What about if I ask permission to talk, and that permission is givern to me in five minutes and I got unmuted just in a middle of a private conversation, this breaks my privacy. It should be better like, you can talk now message and then the participant can unmute clicking the unmute.
Seems like extending the rise hand, and someone can give the stage to the person that rise hand and he can either speak, by unmuting or reject going on stage. This scenario will not break privacy as the person will unmute when that is desired and will not get unmuted randomly in time.

agreed, revised and changed terminology from blocked to locked, since a lock icon can be overlayed to show three states like restricted/off vs unrestricted/off vs unrestricted/on.

8a. host grants permission, attendee mic is unlocked (but still needs to be activated).

1 Like

I’d see a real space for Jitsi to become a tool of choice for teachers if the community would decide to sit down and understand their needs. You’d basically have to have much stronger control for the teacher over the other participants, such as the mute feature described here but also a “waiting room” discussed elsewhere on this forum. Some kids will try to sabotage on-line classes in any way they can… Even choosing a pseudo can be disruptive to class, so that must also be part of the “waiting room” procedure.

Not sure about making these things a paid feature, however… in public schooling systems that might be a barrier to adoption.


Yes, this is what i mean by the “2 types of mutes”. I’m not sure I was clear, but, with the current design, the problem is that any student with a password can just join the class anonymously and disrupt it, by improper use of either sound or image.

Obviously, I understand if jitsi opts not to develop this feature and appreciate Damian (Damencho) disposition to answer us here, but, as someone with a lot of on the ground knowledge (we provide a system for 150+ schools, so I’m suggesting this change more for their sake), I know that the majority of teachers with students over the age of 10 would really find this feature useful. Honestly, it would basically instantly make it a must use for online classes (though it is already the tool we recommend, precisely because of all the other features mentioned by jmichael on his setup example).


Btw, as a context, my company and our clients are from Brazil. So there might by a cultural difference for other countries and this feature might not be as necessary everywhere else, but, with my somewhat limited knowledge of student culture abroad, I think that student’s pranks are a universal thing.

On a side note, we serve mostly private schools, which usually are more prone and able to enforce discipline. Considering that fact, the problem might be even worse than my biased experience suggests.

1 Like

Yes, this feature would be really useful!

And don’t overcomplicate it.
Besides the ‘mute’ options, there could be ‘lock’ options as well.
When the moderator locks your mic (or all at once), it is automatically muted and you cannot turn it on anymore.
When the moderator unlocks it, you can unmute yourself again if and when you want.

Unmute is only possible by the participant itself, nobody should control that.

Jitsi is good, but since it does not have this function suffer not well enough!

I’m looking for a video conference software where i can controll as moderator all users!

1 Like

Then I guess it’s fortunate that there are other options!

(Jitsi is open source so, if you wanted to write the modifications to do this, you can do so, and it looks as if others might be interested in your modified version.)


If I would make modifications to it or have them made (for which I practically pay) then I could not make this version freely available to others!

One should let vote whether such a feature is also desired by others!

You could, but you might choose not to do so (even though jitsi is doing exactly that :))

Because of its free and a lot of people wants this feature too!
If i pay for it it’s not free.
Don’t discuss about it!

I don’t understand.

Jitsi has made its video platform available under an open source licence, without charge.

People are welcome to use it. Similarly, if someone wants to change it to do what they want, they are free to do so — they can modify it, change it, and so on.

If someone wants a particular feature, but doesn’t have the coding skills, they’re either reliant on the jitsi team doing it (and the jitsi team has said it does not want a feature which lets someone unmute someone’s microphone, but, even if they did want it, it would, presumably, have to join a priority queue, along with all other changes), or else getting someone else to write it — which probably means paying someone.

If a group of people all want the same feature, and they want it quickly, I’m just suggesting a practical way forward: clubbing together to pay a developer to make the changes, and then releasing them back to the community.

The result is that you (and everyone else who wants the feature quickly) get the feature you you want quickly, and everyone else who wants the feature in the future gets it too, and the overall project is improved. The joys of open source development!

(Because of the licensing of jitsi, you’re free to change it / pay someone to change it for you, and then not release the changes back to the project. But someone who values the Jitsi project might see the value in sharing their own changes back to the project.)


An alternative might be a way for the “moderator” to enable/disable broadcast of participants’ mic/video.

Each participant retains full control over their own audio and video. The moderator chooses what gets broadcast to participants.

This would affect a change on the server, rather than the client such that the disabled audio/video reach the server but are not included into the multiplex.

Would it fit into the design of the jitsi-meet system?

I am teacher too and in mi humble opinion this feature and another more regarding manage students in a online class would be quite good for teaching. If here it is not posible anyway ¿where are you going to find a developer with the skills to do that?.

El problema es que algunas personas no entienden el sistema y si empiezan silenciados (mute) ellos luego no sabrán activar el micrófono (unmute)