A skeleton walks into a bar. He goes up to the bartender and says, “I’d like a beer and a mop.”
0 Members and 30 Guests are viewing this topic.
You'll never self-actualize the subconscious canopy of stardust with that attitude.
Quote from: Lucifer on March 09, 2008, 01:56:18 PMwe could have an Ignore Thread, where people could say who they were ignoring. but onlyif they chose to - you can't force people to disclose things, and they could have reasons for ignoring people they don't want to make public. after all, freedom, and all that. Gotta oppose this - I don't think it's an infringement of freedom to have a feature that discloses who's ignoring whom. It encourages people to be held accountable for words and actions, which was one of the founding principles. If anybody was worried about privacy, they could just ignore people the old fashioned way - not reading the bloody posts. By adding a feature with confidentiality, the admins would be trying to protect users (albiet in a minor way).
we could have an Ignore Thread, where people could say who they were ignoring. but onlyif they chose to - you can't force people to disclose things, and they could have reasons for ignoring people they don't want to make public. after all, freedom, and all that.
re: the ignore button...we could have an Ignore Thread, where people could say who they were ignoring. but onlyif they chose to - you can't force people to disclose things, and they could have reasons for ignoring people they don't want to make public. after all, freedom, and all that.i'd bung mine on the thread, though, cos i'd want to try and effect change, as ozy said, above. not that i'd hold my breath...anyway, i'm probably too nosy to ignore anyone for very long.
At present I am ignoring only one person via PM. And of course randini has been notorious with spamming via pm, so I cut him off on that level. It's bad enough I have to ignore his gibberish on the public forum. So I'v blocked both his accounts from my pm notifications and if I remember correctly it will tell the sender if they have been blocked.
Would be fun to block one's self Although am not too keen on the whole blocking idea.
Quote from: Soph on March 09, 2008, 12:16:09 PMQuote from: DirtDawg on March 09, 2008, 12:11:54 PMQuote from: Soph on March 09, 2008, 07:59:34 AMi can see why people would be against it, and it could make things very confusing at times, but then i also see it as being up to those who choose to ignore or not to ignore, whether they have that option or not. if someone wants to use it, i think they should be able to, although i wouldn't myself and would hope it wouldn't be used TOO much. i don't see it as censorship or anything, because it's down to each individual person, whether or not they want to use it. if anything, it's giving people more freedom IMO, which is what people seem to want. there are plenty of people already "ignoring" certain peoples posts, from what i've read. all this would do is make it more convenient for themHow could it be more confusing than hundreds of posts to sift through looking for one nugget.not confusing for the person doing the ignoringconfusing for other people, if there's a discussion going on and certain people aren't seeing half of it etcWith the one on Fractalus, if someone quoted a post or part of a post by the ignored person, the quote could still be seen, but you do have a good point, Soph.Still, if the person makes comments on threads based only on the information they have seen, they probably won't respond to something that they haven't read.
Quote from: DirtDawg on March 09, 2008, 12:11:54 PMQuote from: Soph on March 09, 2008, 07:59:34 AMi can see why people would be against it, and it could make things very confusing at times, but then i also see it as being up to those who choose to ignore or not to ignore, whether they have that option or not. if someone wants to use it, i think they should be able to, although i wouldn't myself and would hope it wouldn't be used TOO much. i don't see it as censorship or anything, because it's down to each individual person, whether or not they want to use it. if anything, it's giving people more freedom IMO, which is what people seem to want. there are plenty of people already "ignoring" certain peoples posts, from what i've read. all this would do is make it more convenient for themHow could it be more confusing than hundreds of posts to sift through looking for one nugget.not confusing for the person doing the ignoringconfusing for other people, if there's a discussion going on and certain people aren't seeing half of it etc
Quote from: Soph on March 09, 2008, 07:59:34 AMi can see why people would be against it, and it could make things very confusing at times, but then i also see it as being up to those who choose to ignore or not to ignore, whether they have that option or not. if someone wants to use it, i think they should be able to, although i wouldn't myself and would hope it wouldn't be used TOO much. i don't see it as censorship or anything, because it's down to each individual person, whether or not they want to use it. if anything, it's giving people more freedom IMO, which is what people seem to want. there are plenty of people already "ignoring" certain peoples posts, from what i've read. all this would do is make it more convenient for themHow could it be more confusing than hundreds of posts to sift through looking for one nugget.
i can see why people would be against it, and it could make things very confusing at times, but then i also see it as being up to those who choose to ignore or not to ignore, whether they have that option or not. if someone wants to use it, i think they should be able to, although i wouldn't myself and would hope it wouldn't be used TOO much. i don't see it as censorship or anything, because it's down to each individual person, whether or not they want to use it. if anything, it's giving people more freedom IMO, which is what people seem to want. there are plenty of people already "ignoring" certain peoples posts, from what i've read. all this would do is make it more convenient for them
Ignoring is easy just don't look at posts with the names of people you don't like
Quote from: Callaway on March 09, 2008, 01:48:55 PMQuote from: Soph on March 09, 2008, 12:16:09 PMQuote from: DirtDawg on March 09, 2008, 12:11:54 PMQuote from: Soph on March 09, 2008, 07:59:34 AMi can see why people would be against it, and it could make things very confusing at times, but then i also see it as being up to those who choose to ignore or not to ignore, whether they have that option or not. if someone wants to use it, i think they should be able to, although i wouldn't myself and would hope it wouldn't be used TOO much. i don't see it as censorship or anything, because it's down to each individual person, whether or not they want to use it. if anything, it's giving people more freedom IMO, which is what people seem to want. there are plenty of people already "ignoring" certain peoples posts, from what i've read. all this would do is make it more convenient for themHow could it be more confusing than hundreds of posts to sift through looking for one nugget.not confusing for the person doing the ignoringconfusing for other people, if there's a discussion going on and certain people aren't seeing half of it etcWith the one on Fractalus, if someone quoted a post or part of a post by the ignored person, the quote could still be seen, but you do have a good point, Soph.Still, if the person makes comments on threads based only on the information they have seen, they probably won't respond to something that they haven't read.Sounds like a very sweet dream, Callaway. I imagine you were totally shocked upon awakening.
