Specific person issue

[Scott DeWar]

how long has the ignore list been active? I have utilized it over at Circus Maximus .

 

[Umbran]

how long has the ignore list been active?

We've had the feature for years. I think since as far back as 2003 or 2004, maybe?

 

[renau1g]

It's a fantastic tool.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

Did the two-way ignore functionality ever happen (ie, when A ignores B, then B also can't see A)?
I recall that was being discussed some time ago.

 

[Umbran]

Did the two-way ignore functionality ever happen (ie, when A ignores B, then B also can't see A)?

Nope. That sort of functionality makes sense for a private blog, but not so much for a public forum. If you post here, you don't get to control who sees it.

 

[Dice4Hire]

It's a fantastic tool.

I agree, and more people should use it. I used to have a bunch on my list, but purged it recently, and have only added one person back on. Not bad at all. The list was getting a bit long for my taste.

 

[S'mon]

All the reports in the world are meaningless, if the troll either doesn't tick off any of the moderators, or doesn't do enough, in their opinion, to warrant any action.

I'm sure "one particular person" has had several reports filed against him already, and is still able to post at will.

The issue arises where the trollish poster is careful to stay on the right side of the line in any particular post. It's the same IRL; I'm a Neighbourhood Watch Coordinator, and some people are careful that their antisocial behaviour falls just short of criminality so when I talk to the police Safer Neighbourhoods Team they just shrug. Yet those people are often doing more actual harm than 'real' criminals, eg here in the UK squatters can break in, occupy someone's house, trash the place, and inflict much more suffering than a burglar who just breaks in to steal, but they get off scott free while the burglar goes to jail.

 

[pawsplay]

When I was new to the site, someone said something to me that was incredibly offensive. I responded in what I thought was a measured way. However, I exercised insufficient restraint in describing the other person's shortcomings. I got a three day ban (one day of which I missed sulking away from the forums), I believe my only one to date. Lesson learned.

 

[pawsplay]

There's another kind of person, who posts unpopular opinions, who is kind of abrasive, and is generally unlikeable - but for whom getting an angry or emotional rise out of other people is not the actual purpose of posting. Sometimes, such a person turns out to be more trouble than they are worth to the site, and they are asked to leave. But more frequently, this person learns from experience, and grows into a valuable member of the community.

There's a third kind of person that I think also deserves the reserve of the moderator. Some people simply hold unpopular opinions. Naturally, this means they come across as abrasive when expressing them to people who hold popular opinions, and unlikeable to those who do not like hearing the opinions. Consider, though, that from the standpoint of this person, they are posting to a site where 75% of the other posters have opinions they do not like, and they deal with it. If they can manage to avoid breaking site rules, I think you can, too.

 

[S'mon]

I wasn't thinking of pawsplay or his expression of unpopular opinions, though. The poster I mentioned seems apolitical but enjoys making outrageous statements and getting a rise out of people for the sake of it. In such cases I think it behooves the mod to read back over the past few pages of a thread before taking action on the basis of a single response post that has been reported to them.