EPTIt would be cool to have an Ignore button instead of the Buddy one (i don't see any use for it) that would change to unignore after a user is ignored and what would happen would be that you are not be able to see that user's post.
[R]Ignore user
| Forum Index > Website Feedback |
|
imRadu
1798 Posts
It would be cool to have an Ignore button instead of the Buddy one (i don't see any use for it) that would change to unignore after a user is ignored and what would happen would be that you are not be able to see that user's post. | ||
|
imRadu
1798 Posts
| ||
|
imRadu
1798 Posts
| ||
|
sundance
Slovakia3201 Posts
/ignore mitsy :p | ||
CTStalker
Canada9720 Posts
but yeah, nice feature idea. it's been talked about before i believe | ||
|
mitsy
United States1792 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28736 Posts
:-) | ||
|
RiSE
United States3182 Posts
| ||
IntoTheWow
is awesome32277 Posts
On February 16 2006 05:07 Liquid`Drone wrote: actually I believe stimey is the first person who came up with this idea :-) Maybe it was another of his personas. | ||
Manifesto7
Osaka27157 Posts
On February 16 2006 05:07 Liquid`Drone wrote: actually I believe stimey is the first person who came up with this idea :-) That is why it was funny. | ||
|
CoralReefer
Canada2069 Posts
On February 15 2006 16:05 CTStalker wrote: | ||
|
CTStalker
Canada9720 Posts
| ||
|
KOFgokuon
United States14900 Posts
| ||
|
BroOd
Austin10833 Posts
if you're physically incapable of skipping over a post you dont want to read, a little button isn't going to cure your woes. psychiatric help might. | ||
|
GroT
Belgium3003 Posts
On February 17 2006 21:25 BroOd wrote: spare everyone the fucking melodrama. either read a post or don't. if you're physically incapable of skipping over a post you dont want to read, a little button isn't going to cure your woes. psychiatric help might. I agree (but I am more good mannered!) | ||
|
SweeTLemonS[TPR]
11739 Posts
| ||
|
MyLostTemple
United States2921 Posts
| ||
|
Susan Reader
Canada57 Posts
I follow this principle with my domestic establishment. I have no windows or doors, but instead have people climb to the roof where they can bludgeon themselves an entrance using a small rock. Also in this vein, I walk around naked everywhere. No one has to look if they don't want to. So I agree with Brood too. There is no need to make anyone's life easier when one could use pure will to perform the task. | ||
|
BroOd
Austin10833 Posts
On March 01 2006 13:59 Susan Reader wrote: I read that there is no point to using condoms. Simply control yourself. No one forces you to ejaculate whilst inside. I follow this principle with my domestic establishment. I have no windows or doors, but instead have people climb to the roof where they can bludgeon themselves an entrance using a small rock. Also in this vein, I walk around naked everywhere. No one has to look if they don't want to. So I agree with Brood too. There is no need to make anyone's life easier when one could use pure will to perform the task. None of those analogies have any relevance to this situation. What happens when people hastily ignore everyone who disagrees with them, and then repeat what's already been said multiple times in posts they can't see? Then we have people telling the afforementioned that what they've posted has already been posted, then we have the "Oh, well I have him ignored" posts. Ignoring other posters is like having a debate where the contestants don't have to listen to each other. You're trying to kill a fly with a shotgun here. | ||
|
GeraldMan
United States24 Posts
| ||
|
KOFgokuon
United States14900 Posts
| ||
|
Susan Reader
Canada57 Posts
Some people object to the idea on principle, and those principles have been reduced to absurdity. Look, many people want the feature. No one forces you guys to use it. Let people use it if they want. | ||
|
KOFgokuon
United States14900 Posts
I'm objecting because it's a waste of time. Disprove that. | ||
|
Susan Reader
Canada57 Posts
| ||
|
RiSE
United States3182 Posts
| ||
|
NonYold
United States2814 Posts
On March 04 2006 07:52 Susan Reader wrote: If you bothered to find the 3 or more times this has already been suggested, and bothered to look at how many people ever request any feature, this is easily the most requested feature ever. It would save time for everyone that uses it until this site goes down. If that isn't worth a little coding time, what is? As long as the code also prevents you from replying to any thread that contains a post by someone on your ignore list, it sounds reasonable. The site is already rampant with replies to topics from people who haven't read the entire thread. I'm tired of reading posts by people who obviously haven't read the thread and I know I'm not the only one. I don't think any code will be written that contributes to counter-productivity, especially when the only reason is to compensate for laziness. | ||
|
Susan Reader
Canada57 Posts
| ||
|
sundance
Slovakia3201 Posts
| ||
| ||
