I came here looking for this feature also, sad to see it is closed as WONT DO. I think analysis is not valid on why it is not something to consider.

My use case is this: I have a Confluence space with standards and procedures that is read only for all except the persons in charge of defining the standards. I want to notify everybody when a change is made to a standard.

Without this, I have to do it manually.

I need this to be done, now i've more than 20 users to be added in the watcher list on each page.

Or else suggest me any way to let watcher list inherits from parent page.

YET ANOTHER braindead non-decision from Atlassian.

If it's work, if it takes time to implement, they won't add it.

If it overlaps functionality available at an additional price? They won't add it.

Is it an excellent suggestion that adds value to their product? Well, let's be serious here. That's not a consideration in their workflow. Atlassian doesn't care about their customers once they have their money.

Really sad about this not going to be done.

I'm distressed that this is not going to be added. 

I haven't had time to look at all the suggestions here I'm guessing this has already been suggested by someone, but it would make sense to me to still allow the individual to 'unwatch' i.e. opt out, while the rest of the group remains.  This would mean newly added members to a group will get the notifications for all of the group watches but could easily opt out if they felt they needed to.  Yes it might mean some additional code has to be written but isn't Atlassian a software company?  I guess the time would be better spend moving some buttons around to keep the UI fresh.

It seems so common to find sensible requests in here rejected or ignored, it makes me sad, as I love the product but don't understand some of the reasons given to not do obvious improvements.

I understand that:

• notifications should be reduced as much as possible and
• each user should be able to unwatch since watching is a subscription channel.

A simple change in the requirements should solve the problem stated by @Millman:

• Allow to enter a group name in the "add watchers dialogue". A script then adds the group members as individual watchers, not the group itself!
  • Entering many watchers is a burden when many persons have to be added. This would ease entering individual entries enormously since they have to be added to more than one page.
  • This solution also covers the total watch philosophy. Yes - it might not be fully automated as desired but at least its one "add watcher action" per page which is more easy.

Yes! Yes! Yes! Exactly!!!

Realize why you are doing what you say... but, also realize that you don't understand how everyone uses your product. 

Group watchers are reasonable when the groups are small and have changing members over time.

• Example, setup owners of a specific process.  If people are in the group, they must watch the pages they own to maintain this process.  Yes, they get emails, but YES they need to.  So your arguments are completely invalid for this type of group watcher use.
• Please don't handicap your product because people don't know how to use it appropriately and create "email hell" because they don't have clear lines of who owns what on their projects.

• > 7 Years
• ~ 100 Comments
• > 250 Watchers
• > 450 Votes

...is it so hard to care for your customers' wishes?

It would be great. I manage a space where different AD groups have acces. They need to be notified on every new post and thoses groups include around 2000 people each one. I can't manage thoses notofications for each person.