The "New Forum" Discussion Thread

[Bosco685]

See what I'm saying?

 

 

You're just glad to take a break.

 

 

Ya got me.

 

How remarkably condescending of both of you. Not offended, just pointing it out.

 

I wonder if either of you are aware of that....

 

 

 

I've watched you many times correct someone, and then go into preacher mode like you are standing in the middle of a colosseum looking around as you state, "See people, this is why you don't XXX." Some would say that can come across condescending too.

[vaillant]

I believe RMA broke the record of the longest post quoting other posts here.

They are hard to follow, especially if the original post is not quoted with the name of the OP.

[mica]

The ability to selectively turn off signatures and avatars by user, instead of a global on/off switch

 

The 75x75 avatar limitation is ridiculously small

 

A better ignore function, perhaps one that hides when someone else quotes the person you have on ignore.

[drbanner]

I know the admins are already looking into it based on a previous conversation, but I'll throw this back out there to keep it on the table.

 

The next version of the boards should have the functionality to limit users' ability to post in selected forums/sub-forums within a set # of days of registering. In particular, this was something we discussed for the marketplace, but it could also be used to minimize the spam in the water cooler if it were made a general/broader requirement. A similar functionality based on the # of posts would compliment it, but that's an easier run-around for the ne'erdowellers.

 

 

 

[Jeffro.]

I think everyone's post count at the time of the cutover should be inverted. For instance, my post count is currently 44308. If the cutover to a new board happened right now, my new starting post count would be -44308 and I would then have to work my way up to zero.

 

Of course, Junk Donkey and Comicoplis would hit zero in about 3 days.

[Buzzetta]

With all that, let's go simple because it appears you may be getting lost in all that discussion.

 

It depends on the intellect and cognitive abilities of the reader, of course. But it's extremely straightforward: install a function whereby people that one places on ignore cannot see what the person ignoring says, either. Both parties simply vanish from each other's page.

 

Here is where your assumptions about the benefits of this feature may have challenges.

 

- You want a 'complete ignore' feature, as if that is going to fix things by creating this virtual world where only those fitting your acceptable norm are allowed to engage directly.

 

- You want the ability to jump out from your virtual 'complete ignore' world because of what may come across as a self-righteous need to correct errors of those not fitting your acceptable norm. As if this may change their discussion approach with you upon benefiting from these well-intended corrections (I'm assuming well-intended, as otherwise that is just another situation which builds further friction).

 

In the end, this sounds like someone wanting only their views on the world being heard. But if others respond in a way this individual doesn't like, back into virtual 'complete ignore' world he goes to banish those others from his presence. Sorry, but that sounds like a socially-challenged individual.

 

First of all, reading through this thread feels like I am studying for a test. I've said it before that I would like a complete ignore function. They cannot see me, I cannot see them. I'd like to think of myself as being pretty easy going but even I have my limits. Trying to get along with everyone like the world is some hand holding hugging place devoted to rainbows and unicorns is naive. I am okay with not getting the full experience of someone else for my own peace of mind.

 

This morning I chose to completely ignore the person that was howling in the city and throwing things. I do not want to, nor need to interact with them on the subway. However, I remained with my coworker and friend on the subway. Same premise here. We should have the option to being completely invisible to someone if we choose. The trade off is if we do it to too many people we are only hurting ourselves.

[wombat]

Before this thread I had never given any thought that a user would not only be able to ignore someone but have that person not see their posts as well. I'm not in favor of that. We are posting on a public message board. Find a non public venue if that is what you want. I don't think a user should be able to dictate what any other user sees.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

First of all, reading through this thread feels like I am studying for a test. I've said it before that I would like a complete ignore function. They cannot see me, I cannot see them. I'd like to think of myself as being pretty easy going but even I have my limits. Trying to get along with everyone like the world is some hand holding hugging place devoted to rainbows and unicorns is naive. I am okay with not getting the full experience of someone else for my own peace of mind.

 

This morning I chose to completely ignore the person that was howling in the city and throwing things. I do not want to, nor need to interact with them on the subway. However, I remained with my coworker and friend on the subway. Same premise here. We should have the option to being completely invisible to someone if we choose. The trade off is if we do it to too many people we are only hurting ourselves.

 

Excellent.

[Comicopolis]

I think everyone's post count at the time of the cutover should be inverted. For instance, my post count is currently 44308. If the cutover to a new board happened right now, my new starting post count would be -44308 and I would then have to work my way up to zero.

 

Of course, Junk Donkey and Comicoplis would hit zero in about 3 days.

 

Who?

 

[Comicopolis]

With all that, let's go simple because it appears you may be getting lost in all that discussion.

 

It depends on the intellect and cognitive abilities of the reader, of course. But it's extremely straightforward: install a function whereby people that one places on ignore cannot see what the person ignoring says, either. Both parties simply vanish from each other's page.

 

Here is where your assumptions about the benefits of this feature may have challenges.

 

- You want a 'complete ignore' feature, as if that is going to fix things by creating this virtual world where only those fitting your acceptable norm are allowed to engage directly.

 

- You want the ability to jump out from your virtual 'complete ignore' world because of what may come across as a self-righteous need to correct errors of those not fitting your acceptable norm. As if this may change their discussion approach with you upon benefiting from these well-intended corrections (I'm assuming well-intended, as otherwise that is just another situation which builds further friction).

 

In the end, this sounds like someone wanting only their views on the world being heard. But if others respond in a way this individual doesn't like, back into virtual 'complete ignore' world he goes to banish those others from his presence. Sorry, but that sounds like a socially-challenged individual.

 

First of all, reading through this thread feels like I am studying for a test. I've said it before that I would like a complete ignore function. They cannot see me, I cannot see them. I'd like to think of myself as being pretty easy going but even I have my limits. Trying to get along with everyone like the world is some hand holding hugging place devoted to rainbows and unicorns is naive. I am okay with not getting the full experience of someone else for my own peace of mind.

 

This morning I chose to completely ignore the person that was howling in the city and throwing things. I do not want to, nor need to interact with them on the subway. However, I remained with my coworker and friend on the subway. Same premise here. We should have the option to being completely invisible to someone if we choose. The trade off is if we do it to too many people we are only hurting ourselves.

 

There's quite a few howlers on here.

[Bosco685]

First of all, reading through this thread feels like I am studying for a test. I've said it before that I would like a complete ignore function. They cannot see me, I cannot see them. I'd like to think of myself as being pretty easy going but even I have my limits. Trying to get along with everyone like the world is some hand holding hugging place devoted to rainbows and unicorns is naive. I am okay with not getting the full experience of someone else for my own peace of mind.

 

This morning I chose to completely ignore the person that was howling in the city and throwing things. I do not want to, nor need to interact with them on the subway. However, I remained with my coworker and friend on the subway. Same premise here. We should have the option to being completely invisible to someone if we choose. The trade off is if we do it to too many people we are only hurting ourselves.

 

I totally agree with your thinking!

 

At least your real-world example didn't have you running over to the hooligan (I haven't used that word for years) and tell them 'I'm ignoring you - and stop making noise'. That defeats the purpose of the ignore concept.

[Bosco685]

There's quite a few howlers on here.

 

But some sing much prettier than others.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Before this thread I had never given any thought that a user would not only be able to ignore someone but have that person not see their posts as well. I'm not in favor of that. We are posting on a public message board. Find a non public venue if that is what you want. I don't think a user should be able to dictate what any other user sees.

 

Imagine this scenario:

 

There is a person who has decided he/she doesn't like wombat. He/she is not a stable person, but is actually a high functioning sociopath. These people manage to blend in to society, and by all outward appearances, appear mostly "normal." Their overarching characteristics are a complete lack of genuine (as opposed to feigned) empathy, and a total unwillingness to accept personal blame for anything...it's always someone else's fault.

 

(For a more complete definition of what a sociopath is, see here: http://www.md-health.com/Sociopath-Traits.html )

 

There have been, and are, many sociopaths on this board, as there are in life. Most of them are very, very good at hiding their true motives.

 

So, this particular sociopath has decided to target you, wombat, and make it his/her mission to annoy, harass, frustrate, embarrass, humiliate, or otherwise go out of their way to make your life miserable. However, because they're a high functioning sociopath (meaning, intelligent), they do it subtly and cleverly, always making sure to keep 1 or 2 steps below the threshold of obvious, so they can plausibly deny the true motive for their behavior, and thus avoid moderator interaction.

 

So, what if you, wombat, became such a target? I suspect you think you could ignore it, but after a while, the persistent (but oh so gentle!) tap tap tap, like water dripping on a mountain, would eventually wear anyone down. Paranoia? Maybe, but it's happened here and elsewhere many times. Why? Who knows?

 

As far as "a user dictating what any other user sees"...they're my words, and even if I'm in public (and you are incorrect...this is a PRIVATE message board, whether it's publicly accessible or not)...I'm not obligated to make sure everyone in the vicinity knows what I'm saying. Think of it as walking down the street a ways, to avoid the loud man who keeps trying to interrupt your conversation.

 

And why should someone be forced to find a non-public venue if they don't want to interact with Bob, but have no problem interacting with Fred, Steve, Sally, and Dave? If I don't want you to see what I say, why should I be forced to, if there's another option? Why should anyone feel the need to be silent, out of fear of having to deal with what someone else may say about their comments? (And this works for everyone. If people want to be free of my commentary, they should be, and vice versa.)

[BarryAllen]

I think it is funny (ironically of course) that the main topic of discussion on board improvements is to how much we can "enhance" (or not) the ability to ignore someone.

 

The purpose of an online forum is openly discuss, this clearly would be counterproductive.

 

While I get that an individual would want to ignore someone, I don't think it is right for an individual to be able to dictate who can read their posts. It is one thing to decide you don't want to see someone's posts, but it is another thing entirely to decide for others what they can see as well. This is, after all, a public space.

[wombat]

I'm pretty sure I would find that amusing. I certainly trust my ability to ignore posts that I don't want to read. And if it isn't crossing a line where moderation could step in then more power to them.

 

In your example the sociopath could put someone on ignore and then take all the same shots at the person they want to and the person would never even see it. I don't think that would be a fair situation at all.

[Bosco685]

I think it is funny (ironically of course) that the main topic of discussion on board improvements is to how much we can "enhance" (or not) the ability to ignore someone.

 

The purpose of an online forum is openly discuss, this clearly would be counterproductive.

 

While I get that an individual would want to ignore someone, I don't think it is right for an individual to be able to dictate who can read their posts. It is only thing to decide you don't want to see someone's posts, but it is another thing entirely to decide for others what they can see as well. This is, after all, a public space.

 

If someone feels that worked up they need an ignore feature like that, then it is probably for the better they get it.

[bababooey]

Use the ignore function however you like, if you toggle so what, if someone you have on ignore talks about you go ahead and respond or suck it up and keep ignoring them but the only way to stop people from seeing what you post here on these forums is to use the complete ignore function below.

 

Hopefully this will help some of you.

[wombat]

I think it is funny (ironically of course) that the main topic of discussion on board improvements is to how much we can "enhance" (or not) the ability to ignore someone.

 

The purpose of an online forum is openly discuss, this clearly would be counterproductive.

 

While I get that an individual would want to ignore someone, I don't think it is right for an individual to be able to dictate who can read their posts. It is only thing to decide you don't want to see someone's posts, but it is another thing entirely to decide for others what they can see as well. This is, after all, a public space.

 

If someone feels that worked up they need an ignore feature like that, then it is probably for the better they get it.

 

But that ignores the impact on other users. Why should person A getting worked up be able to impact person B?

[BarryAllen]

I think it is funny (ironically of course) that the main topic of discussion on board improvements is to how much we can "enhance" (or not) the ability to ignore someone.

 

The purpose of an online forum is openly discuss, this clearly would be counterproductive.

 

While I get that an individual would want to ignore someone, I don't think it is right for an individual to be able to dictate who can read their posts. It is only thing to decide you don't want to see someone's posts, but it is another thing entirely to decide for others what they can see as well. This is, after all, a public space.

 

If someone feels that worked up they need an ignore feature like that, then it is probably for the better they get it.

 

I disagree, but that is fine.

 

My thoughts would be that if someone really needs an ignore feature like that they probably need a break from here (or perhaps from many things). Maybe even a forced hiatus?

 

[VintageComics]

Before this thread I had never given any thought that a user would not only be able to ignore someone but have that person not see their posts as well. I'm not in favor of that. We are posting on a public message board. Find a non public venue if that is what you want. I don't think a user should be able to dictate what any other user sees.

 

Imagine this scenario:

 

There is a person who has decided he/she doesn't like wombat. He/she is not a stable person, but is actually a high functioning sociopath. These people manage to blend in to society, and by all outward appearances, appear mostly "normal." Their overarching characteristics are a complete lack of genuine (as opposed to feigned) empathy, and a total unwillingness to accept personal blame for anything...it's always someone else's fault.

 

(For a more complete definition of what a sociopath is, see here: http://www.md-health.com/Sociopath-Traits.html )

 

There have been, and are, many sociopaths on this board, as there are in life. Most of them are very, very good at hiding their true motives.

 

So, this particular sociopath has decided to target you, wombat, and make it his/her mission to annoy, harass, frustrate, embarrass, humiliate, or otherwise go out of their way to make your life miserable. However, because they're a high functioning sociopath (meaning, intelligent), they do it subtly and cleverly, always making sure to keep 1 or 2 steps below the threshold of obvious, so they can plausibly deny the true motive for their behavior, and thus avoid moderator interaction.

 

So, what if you, wombat, became such a target? I suspect you think you could ignore it, but after a while, the persistent (but oh so gentle!) tap tap tap, like water dripping on a mountain, would eventually wear anyone down. Paranoia? Maybe, but it's happened here and elsewhere many times. Why? Who knows?

 

As far as "a user dictating what any other user sees"...they're my words, and even if I'm in public (and you are incorrect...this is a PRIVATE message board, whether it's publicly accessible or not)...I'm not obligated to make sure everyone in the vicinity knows what I'm saying. Think of it as walking down the street a ways, to avoid the loud man who keeps trying to interrupt your conversation.

 

And why should someone be forced to find a non-public venue if they don't want to interact with Bob, but have no problem interacting with Fred, Steve, Sally, and Dave? If I don't want you to see what I say, why should I be forced to, if there's another option? Why should anyone feel the need to be silent, out of fear of having to deal with what someone else may say about their comments? (And this works for everyone. If people want to be free of my commentary, they should be, and vice versa.)

 

Let's get down to brass tacks! Cliff notes, please. Who is the sociopath?