The Ethics of Two Way Ignore

[MNblockhead]

Maybe "similar advocates" might be a better term. But at this point I'm just splitting hairs.

Factions?

 

[Gradine]

Just a reminder...

View attachment 363480

Spoken with the certainty of a man who has definitely done the latter

 

[Blue]

Factions?

Factions to me imply some consistency and loyalty. What I was saying was that there are people who for certain topics are passionate and will up-vote those who agree with them on those topics, but can be indifferent or on the opposite side with the same people on other topics.

 

[Lanefan]

At one time, we had a "like"-based reputation system. Clique behavior was seen within it. Circles of people who always liked each other's posts drove their reputation up above the masses because of the focused shared behavior.

Is that why I can't find the "most liked" and "most laughed" standings any more? Ditto the standings of the highest post counts?

 

[Lanefan]

While true (I went to some of the Boston Gamedays way back when), that's not really the point.

I have never been in the same physical space as Morrus and Danny. Never even been on a voice call with either of them. Is anyone going to be so presumptuous as to assert that I don't know these people? No?

Sure, I will.

You and I have interacted at various times here on the forum but I wouldn't presume for a second to say I know you; and wouldn't until-unless we were to physically meet in person. I merely know of you, as in I know you exist as someone called Umbran in this forum, which is different.

IMO exclusively-online contact doesn't qualify as knowing someone, or even having met them; which is why one of my mantras these days goes: "Social media isn't".

Then, clearly, you can get to know people through online interaction as well as meeting physically.

You can get to know what those people choose to reveal through their postings; but without a physical meeting that's all you get, and who knows how accurate it might be.

 

[Thomas Shey]

You can get to know what those people choose to reveal through their postings; but without a physical meeting that's all you get, and who knows how accurate it might be.

People are not any better over a long enough time hiding their nature in text than in person. If anything you're more likely to hit them when they're unprepared and not guarding properly in a online text environment than in normal social ones.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

In terms of blocking, I appreciate the feature. There are certainly times when a person wants to be able to disengage from others, without having to call in moderation. I use ignore for three purposes-

1. If I find that my interactions with an individual are getting really heated, I will block them. For me, this is like a timeout. It lets me take a break from them, and from whatever is causing the issue. After all, in the heat of whatever it is, it can be hard to tell if it is you, or them, or just a combination of factors. That is temporary, and I will unblock them after a while, revisit the issue, make sure my blood is not still angered, and carry on.

I find that this is really helpful when it comes to de-escalation and taking a timeout. In other words, I use block to take a break. It's like the famous internet cartoon that we all post (someone is wrong on the internet....). Whatever the issue is now, it won't be in a few weeks.


2. The other person has done something so bad or offensive I just need them blocked. Usually, they end up banned at some point, so no biggie.


3. Then there are a handful of people on my perma-block list. This is two categories- first, a couple of people that I have had to repeatedly block and unblock. Life is to too short.

Factions to me imply some consistency and loyalty. What I was saying was that there are people who for certain topics are passionate and will up-vote those who agree with them on those topics, but can be indifferent or on the opposite side with the same people on other topics.

While being somewhat oblique about the subject, I think that there are factions (or groups around certain topics) here, just as people tend to naturally form around various subject in any social setting. The other people on my perma-block list are a very small group, and it has been my experience that my negative interactions on the forum went down by an amazing amount after I blocked that group.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

I like the two way block too.

I previously talked about blocking people on a temporary basis but I find I can talk more about games and less about other things by keeping the blocks.

Also I am only human. I think blocking and not engaging helps me to follow the rules with no problem.

I have a tough job and life can be life…no time for unfun. Sadly I have found while I might delete a post and move on stupidity (mine and others) gets in my head rent free at times. Nope. No thanks. Blocking is good and ok and useful.

If we are talking about game/edition A and you clearly hate it to the point of not being able to be anything but negative I don’t have much tolerance anymore. I realized recently there is no way to have a discussion with that level of negativity.

Blocking increases my interesting interactions and learning.

It’s not an indictment of the other person in many cases. It’s a tool to maximize enjoyment. And then there are a few caustic people who seem miserable. Godspeed. I am not wanting to join that.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Well, some are clear ones I disagree on - similar to @Gradine 's reasons- ones that feel like they are being anti-inclusive / railing against more inclusive systems, but in a way that doesn't cross the line in terms of the rules of the site (though a couple I see have since been banned, so potentially did cross that line) - and I just don't want to read those sorts of views.

Others it is their relentless negativity on some topics, and the way they express it - e.g. as an example that hopefully doesn't cause an issue - Micah comes across as often negative on certain topics, but I find the way they express them a reasonable way, that even if I disagree with some of their opinions, they don't cross into the relentless negativity I see from other posters that seem to want to drag people's joy down. Micah states their preferences / why they aren't happy, but they don't suggest others are wrong to be happy, whereas others seem to basically accuse those who are happy of being badfunwrong (and use specific terms sometimes that are very much attacking, but won't list them here). Some of those I may agree with their general position in terms of whether I'm happy or not, but I don't like they way they tar those on the opposite side.

One other person I have on ignore, I don't know if I disagree or not with their opinions, as I find their way of communicating so opaque that I just don't understand their posts, and it takes time away from reading posts I do understand. I don't think they're communicating wrong as such, just a way that clashes with the way I read posts, and so makes my life easier to not see them as such.

Thank you. That was very nice to hear.

 

[Umbran]

Sure, I will.

You and I have interacted at various times

With respect - don't flatter yourself. I wouldn't claim to know you. But the level of contact I have with you "at various times" is a smidgen of the contact I have with Morrus and Danny.