Ignoring People

[jefmcg]

In all honesty, when I started this thread, Shaun was the only person I wanted any response from.

Then why did you use a public forum, and not a personal message ("conversation")?

I was sort of hoping that, if I were to provide a list of names, if one of those were the new content, it wouldn't alert me on my watched threads list. That doesn't sound too difficult to me.

It's programmatically quite doable, I'm sure. But how to describe it on the UI? It took four pages to get what you meant here, I can't imagine a clear UI that would give that option. 'People that I still see, but their messages don't affect the "new posts", "watched posts", "alerts" fields'? I can't think of a way to express it, and nor can you or we wouldn't have got it wrong in our followups.

(Just stay away for a few hours, then people you regard as important (or "people you don't regard as unimportant") will have add to most of the threads you care about)

 

[Markymark]

I only ignore one person whose avatar annoys me as it's an injury and I dont like to look at it.

Can shaun put everyone who doesn't post using an iPhone on my ignore list as their opinions are irrelevant?

 

[Pat "5mph"]

Can shaun put everyone who doesn't post using an iPhone on my ignore list as their opinions are irrelevant?

What about non IPhone users posting from oustide London?

 

[jefmcg]

I only ignore one person whose avatar annoys me as it's an injury and I dont like to look at it.

You don't use an ad-blocker? Quelle Horreur! How can you survive on the internet? If you do, just add the offending avatar to your filter.

I blocked someone because their posts are purple. I couldn't configure adblocker for that. Life is too short for purple prose unless it's "a three-volume novel of more than usually revolting sentimentality".

Can shaun put everyone who doesn't post using an iPhone on my ignore list as their opinions are irrelevant?

You know you can't write software for an iPhone on an iPhone? I'm not giving up my macbook just to make you happy.

 

[slowmotion]

Is technology really the answer to your quest to ignore somebody? Can't you just read the first sentence of their post, mutter "Twat!" and scroll on down?

 

[martint235]

Then why did you use a public forum, and not a personal message ("conversation")?



It's programmatically quite doable, I'm sure. But how to describe it on the UI? It took four pages to get what you meant here, I can't imagine a clear UI that would give that option. 'People that I still see, but their messages don't affect the "new posts", "watched posts", "alerts" fields'? I can't think of a way to express it, and nor can you or we wouldn't have got it wrong in our followups.

(Just stay away for a few hours, then people you regard as important (or "people you don't regard as unimportant") will have add to most of the threads you care about)

It's just levels of blacklisting isn't it?

Default is you see all posts by everyone but in the ignore set up you have fully ignore or don't notify me of posts by this person

 

[Markymark]

What about non IPhone users posting from oustide London?

The thinnest of thin ice.

 

[summerdays]

@summerdays can mods ignore posters?
I guess not, otherwise how can they be moderated?
I don't ignore anybody, but I confess to bypass a few

Mods can ignore people in the same way as others, but obviously if we needed to moderate a thread with ignored content we would need to show it. And it would probably be unlikely that every mod had the same person on ignore. It's just a useful feature to reduce irritation levels.

 

[r04DiE]

Well possibly to an outside observer, not to the person espousing the dogma. Although I think in most cases in an online debate, it's best to imagine yourself trying to convince an impartial observer of your point of view, rather than trying to change the mind of the person you're actually debating. That way lie petty arguments, Godwin and flouncing.

Well, the outside observer convinced otherwise is a good thing, the person espousing the dogma convinced is a bonus. Never say never.

 

[snorri]

What about non IPhone users posting from oustide London?

For them, a fate worse than death.

 

[winjim]

Well, the outside observer convinced otherwise is a good thing, the person espousing the dogma convinced is a bonus. Never say never.

Tell you what, next time I notice this particular person write something particularly idiotic, I'll tag you in and you can have a go.

 

[jefmcg]

It's just levels of blacklisting isn't it?

Default is you see all posts by everyone but in the ignore set up you have fully ignore or don't notify me of posts by this person

If I were developing this feature, the first thing I'd ask from you would be for you to mock up the UI; where you put the option, what phrasing, what would happen if you invoked it etc etc. It's all a bit vague and handwavy.

But as no one else seems to want this feature, I doubt anyone is going to implement it.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

You can't use logic to challenge dogma.

You cannot reason someone out of an opinion they weren't reasoned into in the first place.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Yes you can.

You can. But your attempt to change their mind is doomed to fail in the vast majority of cases.

 

[r04DiE]

Tell you what, next time I notice this particular person write something particularly idiotic, I'll tag you in and you can have a go.

Deal