+ignore feature?

On September 10 2004 19:12 Casper... wrote:
it would also need to include pm's

On September 11 2004 13:32 Refrain[FriZ] wrote:
ignoring people = censorship
censorship = ignorance
ignorance = dumb

On September 11 2004 17:32 Rt-S.FakeSteve wrote:
if stupidity is killing eniram we need alot more idiots around here

On September 18 2004 15:29 tfeign wrote:
Well aware of what? You don't need to say things like "flaunting my limitations" when my opinion is different from yours ok? Censoring yourself in a forum is to me is a bad idea. There is no such thing as an ignore feature in ANY forums. If ignore feature is a good idea it would be at least implemented somewhere else already. If there are idiotic posts, nuke/delete. Moderators will have a say in what's an ignorable post by deleting it. Mass idiotic posts from one individual, ban. To me I don't see how there's a real need for individual post-ignoring. We do have good moderators and admins here. Adding ignore feature is like a way of saying mods aren't doing their job.

On September 21 2004 07:53 tfeign wrote:
Tell me how the hell is adding an ignore feature not like saying the mods aren't doing their job?

On September 11 2004 05:21 STIMEY d okgm fish wrote:
all those assholes who have to flame my every post could ignore me and stop posting their idiotic spam.

if ur worried about people overusing it and then ppl stop responding to eachother, why not give ignore list in a limited way? like, let everyone ignore two people max. and then show stats on it .. who is the most ignored? :-)

On September 11 2004 14:09 STIMEY d okgm fish wrote:
anyone with experience in other, more established means of online communication would have firsthand knowledge of how vital and necessary ignore features are. ignoring people is a common and necessary practice on IRC, usenet, and others. it is unfortunate that this web-based forum does not provide the same necessary tools.

some people, over the course of hundreds, if not thousands, of posts, have proven to me that i will never need to read any of their posts ever again. but maybe others like those very same posts! this is why you let people choose who they ignore. it will reduce the amount of spam, as spammers will receive less responses, trolls will bait less people, etc. the responses that end up being posted will be much more constructive when people are allowed to ignore those that they feel they are better off ignoring. which comes to the old "will power" argument. maybe you can ignore everything you want to with your mind. maybe you feel everyone else should. but as i pointed out, this argument hasn't held up for IRC and usenet veterans of decades. it shouldn't hold up here either.

On September 22 2004 12:35 STIMEY d okgm fish wrote:






ok so basically. ignore = good for people. admins doing good = good. got it? try participating in the discourse sometime instead of changing the subject. to answer your stupid question: yes, in a perfect world, no one would need ignore. admins would stop everything that everyone doesnt need to see, and everyone wuold agree. but in a world where people have different desires and standards, providing an ignore feature fits better and doesnt force us all to agree on the same things.

see also:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=13286
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=14801

On September 22 2004 15:03 tfeign wrote:
Why the exactly do you feel the need to ignore people?

Just because you read an idiotic post from one person it doesn't mean that person will always make idiotic posts.

I have seen a fair share of iditioc posts myself, but does that mean these individuals will always make idiotic posts in every thread? No. If someone always make idiotic posts, you can be sure they'll be banned.

You don't have to agree with everyone. Not everyone agree with me, and I sure as hell don't always agree with everyone. But just because I don't agree with a particular person on one particular subject does that mean I should ignore every single one of his posts in every subject from now on? I don't think so.

1. Censorship is bad.

2. It's like a way of saying mods aren't doing their job, that we have to go moderate posts ourselves because the mods aren't doing it.

3. It's useless. If someone always make idiotic posts, you can be sure that he won't be here for long. You won't have to take it upon your own to squelch his posts. If you squelch him, you are saying that he ALWAYS write things that are stupid and useless. Again, a person like this would be banned already.

4. If you argue that it doesn't have to be an idiotic post, but just something you don't agree on, then you need to learn that not everyone agree with each other.

5. This is a FORUM. A forum where people discuss their ideas. Without the ideas and contribution of different individuals there wouldn't be too much to discuss about. There are, yes, a few individuals whose ideas are very stupid and ignorant. But you can be sure that ignoring these individuals would probably be the worst way to the solve it.

6. So what? So what if you read one idiotic post once in a while from an individual? It's not like everyone will make the most awesome posts all the time and it definitely is not true that an individual who made a stupid post at one time, or someone who disagreed with you at one time is going to disagree with your opinion every single time.

On May 04 2004 18:49 STIMEY d okgm fish wrote:
i just found out that 3 people i would have squelched were all blackjack anyways.

every once in a while you see people on irc who pretend they can mentally block out everything they dont care to see, they refuse to use /ignore. they are in the minority, of course :| they like to look down on people who use /ignore, too. i guess that's one of the perks of having super powers is that you get to blame everyone else for not having them; you can call them childish, for instance.

and u think it doesnt apply to msg boards? i dont know about you but ive read a post before and not realized who wrote it until getting a ways into it and then going "wtf, this is shit", i look at who posted it, and sure enough, i shoulda checked the name. it's a mistake i make, now and then, and it would be nice if there was a feature to help me decrease this. sometimes i just know i'm better off if i never see some people's posts ever again, it's for the best, and the best way to let me do this is with some forum option. sure, "in theory", with rekrul/fakesteve-like super powers, i can magically not respond to anything written by certain people, but now and then, it just doesn't work out that way. calling me childish might give u the moral high ground but it doesnt help me any less to be tempted to respond to the consistently horrible posts by certain people

what about people who have made hundreds of consecutive horrible posts like you?

different people have different standards. you can have plenty of good reasons to conveniently skip the posts of some people even if others can have fine reasons to read it. furthermore, sometimes an idiot doesn't deserve a ban, and some people want to read their posts. why force everyone to though? giving people a way to choose is bad?

giving people choice to hear who they choose when they choose to is not the same as censorship.

wrong. it's useful. if someone shows you that they make posts you'd rather skip, then you can actually skip them. even if admins dont want to ban them, rightly or wrongly. just because one person wants to ignore another, that doesnt mean that someone needs to be banned.

it doesn't have to be a disagreement, just something that someone would rather not see over and over and over again. it's a personal decision. if you allow an ignore feature, then people who want to see the posts can, and the other ones are spared from any temptation to respond in an unconstructive way, and they can more easily see the posts that they wish to respond to. there are too many posts in most threads as it is. giving people some power to prioritize their reading would enhance the quality of responses.

countless public communications media throughout history have been great while having an ignore feature, particularly usenet and irc.

repeating myself for tfeign: it is a personal option because different people have different needs. while i might not ever need to see an amat post again, others might. this doesn't mean amat deserves a ban in any way. if you give people the choice, less spam is generated and people can more easily see the posts that they will productively respond to. it's giving people a choice, not taking it away.

On May 04 2004 18:49 STIMEY d okgm fish wrote:
i just found out that 3 people i would have squelched were all blackjack anyways.

every once in a while you see people on irc who pretend they can mentally block out everything they dont care to see, they refuse to use /ignore. they are in the minority, of course :| they like to look down on people who use /ignore, too. i guess that's one of the perks of having super powers is that you get to blame everyone else for not having them; you can call them childish, for instance.

and u think it doesnt apply to msg boards? i dont know about you but ive read a post before and not realized who wrote it until getting a ways into it and then going "wtf, this is shit", i look at who posted it, and sure enough, i shoulda checked the name. it's a mistake i make, now and then, and it would be nice if there was a feature to help me decrease this. sometimes i just know i'm better off if i never see some people's posts ever again, it's for the best, and the best way to let me do this is with some forum option. sure, "in theory", with rekrul/fakesteve-like super powers, i can magically not respond to anything written by certain people, but now and then, it just doesn't work out that way. calling me childish might give u the moral high ground but it doesnt help me any less to be tempted to respond to the consistently horrible posts by certain people

i dont know about you but ive read a post before and not realized who wrote it until getting a ways into it and then going "wtf, this is shit", i look at who posted it, and sure enough, i shoulda checked the name. it's a mistake i make, now and then, and it would be nice if there was a feature to help me decrease this.

On September 22 2004 15:49 tfeign wrote:

On September 22 2004 17:31 tfeign wrote:
Why did you bolden the full sentence?

How is adding an ignore feature give more good than harm?

What if the ignored person reply to one of your posts in a way that would need a response from you? You blocked his message so you wouldn't have a way to defend yourself or counteract his message.

What if the ignored person posts a thread, only to have it blocked by you.

What are the harms? Costing you about 10 seconds to read a post?

If you don't like it, don't respond to it.

On September 22 2004 15:03 tfeign wrote:
It's not like everyone will make the most awesome posts all the time