QFMFT
So, to be clear, you read every single piece of text that appears on your screen for each and every topic you enter, in great and comprehensive detail? You’ve never once skimmed, not looked at, or scrolled past any topic replies appearing on your screen – ever?
I certainly understand reading replies directed explicitly to you in great detail – so your argument is that these people target you, reply to you, and you are physically forced to read their replies as a result?
Because I got the impression these were just general replies to the topic, not replies that quoted your posts, mentioned you by name, or otherwise indicated a direct reply to you.
Frankly, I don’t see why anyone should be arguing with @Wumpus about this. It’s Tom’s decision. If Tom wants to support the community by having that option then it should be done, or we should find different software for the forum.
@wumpus are you being obtuse on purpose? Or are you just trolling now? It seems like a lot of the people here want this.
A) I generally do not skip any post or part of posts in a topic I am actively reading and participating in, no.
B) It’s completely fucking irrelevant to whether ignore is useful and should be implemented, which it is, and should be.
Well, for starters, Discourse is used on many other forums across the internet, and I for one would also like the option of using ignore on those forums, although I spend far less time on other forums and have correspondingly less need for it.
That’s fair, I guess I was coming at it from a how can we get Discourse to do X, in order to meet the needs of this forum, vs a general discourse out in the wild thing.
Also, Discourse currently doesn’t even have ignore functionality, so it’s not like it’s a matter of whether Tom wants it on or off, like avatars or likes. It would have to be coded and implemented, which is at least partially up to wumpus. It’s certainly true that we could move on to a forum software that does offer ignores, but I mean, there were reasons we made the switch in the first place and we knew ignore wasn’t implemented at the time. So I suspect that as much as many of us crave ignore, it’s not going to be enough of a sticking point for that kind of major change.
If we get likes, I’ll give you my support on ignore.
Wumpus gonna wump.
It is weird, though. I got the impression that his opposition to the “ignore” feature was rather grandly philosophical. I’d hate to think it was down to a simple failure to appreciate how people use it. But I’m honestly not sure.
All in favor?
Who’s the Nazi NOW huh?
All Republicans, duh.
In an unrelated sentiment, Ignore is a good thing.
In my best Jeff Foxworthy voice:
You might be a father of a daughter if…
You are more concerned that young lady might hurt herself getting off that car in heels than you are appreciating her beauty.
So this is some kind of obsessive need for you to read every post in every topic, no matter what? Even posts that are not directed at you in any way, shape or form? You literally can’t help yourself, and can’t scroll, you must read every word of every post in every topic you enter?
I find it bizarre that in a world of humans ignoring, for their own sanity, 99% of the stuff that happens, and to be frank most of the text on their computer screen, you’re arguing that this is – at least for you – impossible. That’s… weird. And to be honest, I don’t really believe you.
The reason I do ask, however, is because I want specifics. This whole “I am a white dude who absolutely must be able to ignore other specific white dudes, or I will become very cross with you” line of reasoning (with the Facebook single-platform-for-the-world caveat) has been very slippery and incoherent from the start.
For example, here’s an argument that – unlike any of yours – I found rather compelling. Perhaps you might read and learn from it.
I used to wonder what the purpose of ignore was. Then I got to the point with a certain user where I could not resist his trolling - I felt I had to respond to his idiotic remarks every time he posted. At that point I realized ignore, for me, wasn’t so I didn’t have to hear his ranting and raving, it was so I wasn’t tempted to respond to his baiting.
I think the poll is slightly flawed in the gap between lots and rarely. I would be interested in seeing a different poll, “is the ignore feature necessary, or would I be happy visiting this forum if it did not have ignore?”
The two concepts we’re discussing, though, should be considered separately.
Yes, the are trouble users that should be identified and somehow dealt with. If someone is consistently reported for trolling, either the system needs to take care of that automatically (their posts are lighter than other posts, for instance, encouraging people to skim them) or they need moderator action.
However, there are situations where two users simply rub each other the wrong way. The phrasing one uses just makes the other user’s skin crawl because they can’t overcome their assumptions and take the posts at face value. Whatever the reason, these two users will clash and clash again over semantic issues, baseless assumptions, and personal history with each other, where if they never read each others posts they’d be great contributors.
So there is a compelling need for ignore beyond the simple “some users are bad”.
Followed some months later by
Note that the above is something I wrote many months ago right after I had started muting this individual. I recently unmuted them and have since had no issues. Looking back on things I note that I went through an experience I didn’t realize was having such a negative impact on me, and it was likely that nothing about this user had changed, but I could no longer handle them due to changes in my own life. The mute actually enabled me to continue to come to the forum, wheres I was seriously considering leaving it. That would have been bad, though, as, again, looking back that forum provided a tremendous amount of support to me during that difficult time.
The reason I suspect the survey is so skewed is because the feature is not advertised. Every time it’s brought up in forums I’ve participated in a number of users are obviously surprised that such a feature even exists, and more than once has it caused a discussion about the merits and ethics of such a feature.
I believe that well-implemented such a feature could actually result in a happier forum, but it would have to be, to some degree, advertised or more frequently suggested as a solution for some moderation issues. In fact it would be interesting to give some thought to using it as a tool of moderation. Rather than a ban, block the two problem users form each other for a period of time and see if that cools things down. Not applicable to most moderation activities, but I can see certain situations where we wouldn’t have to lose users because of bad blood.
I haven’t said it’s impossible. I’ve said that I don’t, and should not have to because there is a technological solution.
That first post is LITERALLY WHAT I HAVE BEEN FUCKING SAYING THIS WHOLE TIME. Like, practically word for word.
Also, why the flipping fuck are specifics relevant except to start an argument with people I might want to ignore?
Yet again. What the fuck?
And again.
And again.
I won’t quote more. You are fucking clueless.
Feel free to ignore me if it bothers you.
Oh sorry, you can’t!
