feature request: ignore lists (usernames) for the forums

Soenda said:

Adverse Camber said:

...and it should be public. Why not a tag on each post showing the
complaints made against it. Then at least the wider audience could
make up their own mind about whether the complaints were justified. I
remember the case of joe mama where a subsequent poll showed that 96%
thought that the ban should be rescinded. One vote said otherwise,
though, and it was the vote with the power.
In the end, thinking up more sensible solutions has no value unless
the mods are inclined to be sensible.

Click to expand...

What you end up doing is reinforcing unwanted behavior. Showing
someone's collective complaints invites recipients to start to try to
outdo one another in how many complaints each can wrack up. We've
already seen people who were banned comparing the number of times in
a perverse bid for attention.

Click to expand...

That assumes the majority are here to troll. I don't think that's the case. Mostly, people who get complained about are controversialists who don't understand properly how much people get wound up about what they say. A bit of feedback, and they can adjust the way they say things to avoid offence, while still participating in the debate. On web forums, we miss the visual cues about when it's time to back off, feedback of that kind gives an alternative. Arbitrary bans and thread pulling just creates trolls, from people who feel they've been treated unfairly.

Soenda said:

Anything that takes moderators' time and record keeping is counter
productive. A friends/foe list allows individuals to act on their own
taste. Someone said "One man's troll is another man's friend." I'm
not so interested in getting people kicked off as I am eliminating
nuisances. Some people get a kick out of abrasive posts, saying that
they are what keep them coming back to DPR. Why wait to build up a
consensus when the option exists to click a button/problem solved?

Click to expand...

One man's nuisance is another man's interesting conversationalist. Joe mama was a case in point, had a turn of phrase which could wind people up, but in the end was a very positive contributer here. Any system that labels Joe a troll and bans him is a bad system, especially when so many trolls survive and thrive here. It's hard to claim that the present system works.

--
Adverse

Hi,

(I didn't read all of this thread so my apologies if this was suggested before)

How about a small icon for each thread in the thread list - you click on that icon and the thread goes away in your view (client-side; should be similar to the 'read threads/postings' logic).

That way I can get rid of all those repetitive, silly or sometimes very dumb threads , but won't lose users completely.

I think it's hard to follow a discussion in a thread when a lot of postings are not displayed because of the user-kill-file.

To lose certain threads, however, doesn't create this crooked 'reality': you have to click on the icon, so you know these existed.

Just my thoughts,

regards,

Claus.

--

... when the photograph annihilates itself as medium to be no longer a sign but the thing itself...

Adverse Camber said:

Michael_J said:

Adverse Camber said:

...and it should be public. Why not a tag on each post showing the
complaints made against it. Then at least the wider audience could
make up their own mind about whether the complaints were justified. I
remember the case of joe mama where a subsequent poll showed that 96%
thought that the ban should be rescinded. One vote said otherwise,
though, and it was the vote with the power.
In the end, thinking up more sensible solutions has no value unless
the mods are inclined to be sensible.

Click to expand...

Tag the "offending" post. AND have a stat showing how many time a
poster has hit the complaint button. It would show the offenders and
the forum nannies.

Example:
Jane Doe - 244 posts, 5 threads started, has hit the complaint button
649,211 times.

Click to expand...

Hi, Malcolm,
I think that should be 'Debbie Doe'.

--
Adverse

Click to expand...

You had to have some history here and do some snooping to come up with that. Or do you and Doe hang together in South Park? \;-)

--
People who claim to be open minded never see it my way.

RAL said:

If you don't like someone, why can't you just ignore their posts.

Click to expand...

Well, you cannot use the "next" button and accomplish that.

RAL131504 said:

Other folks might want to see all the responses. I suppose you would
only be blocking their responses from your personally viewed version.

Click to expand...

Of course. That is the basic concept.

RAL131504 said:

If other's responses to your posts were not visible to others it
would be pretty useless to those that want to be open minded and see
both sides of the story.

Click to expand...

One problem is that some posters manage to post an ungoing attack on another poster, which is pretty far from a balanced 2-way discussion. It also consists of many posts in a given thread. It wastes our time.

RAL131504 said:

I suppose I don't completely understand this and just how it would work, so I'll just go merrily on my way.

Click to expand...

That is pretty amusing. Clever solution; I hope it proves to be effective.

Mike_PEAT said:

Anyway ignore lists don't work...it's like email spam...you can keep
adding people to the ignore list, but there will always be another
one. By at least using the complaint link, you can get rid of some!

Click to expand...

The complain link is not in jeopardy here.

Mike_PEAT said:

Anyway, how would it work...say you blocked me because of something I
said you didn't like...would it only block my posts when I post a new
message, or every reply as well?

Click to expand...

New messages as well as replies. If you notice, it is with replies that a troll really shines.

Mike_PEAT said:

Say you had a question and I spent the time to answer your question...is my > reply blocked and thereby my time wasted? That's what I REALLY hate about > this idea!

Click to expand...

Anyone so impulsive as to block another poster on the basis of one disagreement deserves the ill effects of their impulsivity. While there may be trolls on the forums, most posters are capable of rudimentary reasoning and aren't expected to block a potentially helpful poster due to a transient disagreement.
Further, blocking is entirely reversible.

natureman said:

Adverse Camber said:

...and it should be public. Why not a tag on each post showing the
complaints made against it. Then at least the wider audience could
make up their own mind about whether the complaints were justified. I
remember the case of joe mama where a subsequent poll showed that 96%
thought that the ban should be rescinded. One vote said otherwise,
though, and it was the vote with the power.
In the end, thinking up more sensible solutions has no value unless
the mods are inclined to be sensible.

Click to expand...

Hi Bob.

Click to expand...

Doe is going to be upset that South Park made it back AGAIN! \;-D

--
People who claim to be open minded never see it my way.

igb said:

Better tucked out.

But it appears you have issues with black comedians. Shame.

Come on, now, apologize, you know you want to.

Click to expand...

Ha!

--
People who claim to be open minded never see it my way.

Adverse Camber said:

I should add, this problem of malpractice on behalf of moderators is
common to many web forums. Administering discipline is a process
which requires judgment and training in all walks of life. There is
no evidence that moderators on these forums are selected for judgment
or receive any training.
--
Adverse

Click to expand...

Moderation ought to be approached as a job which involves enforcing rules, like blind justice, rather than as an outlet for life's minor irregularities.

Claus A said:

How about a small icon for each thread in the thread list - you click
on that icon and the thread goes away in your view (client-side;
should be similar to the 'read threads/postings' logic).

That way I can get rid of all those repetitive, silly or sometimes
very dumb threads , but won't lose users completely.

Click to expand...

It would be nice to have both options!

Claus A said:

I think it's hard to follow a discussion in a thread when a lot of
postings are not displayed because of the user-kill-file.

Click to expand...

Thus demonstrating that some threads don't contain much of value, serving mainly as an outlet for excessive bile.

What has been amply demonstrated is that you deserve praise for your contribution to the arguments in favor of blocking individual posters.

Ok, so if they had this feature, and they had you on their ignore list. Then you would have posted this, and they would have never seen your post. So you keep posting it time and time again?

Block/Ignore list disrupt information.

So you block a few people. Then you start reading threads, and you find their is threads that don't make much sense. You don't understand where people are coming from. The reason is people are responding to what you don't see. If you respond in that not knowing what was all being said, you then make an even bigger mess of things for those who have nothing blocked, as now your post is very confusing.

The vastly better solution is the moderation and moderator alert of problem posters. Let the problem be fixed globally.

Some of the worst posters and those we would like to go away are the most prevalent posters. Start ignoring them and threads look like swiss cheese and can't be followed.

Once again, I think more folks need to embrace the simplicity of the DPR forum design. Adding more features is not good. Simpler is better. Phil could definitely sell/license his forum code if he wanted with lots of takers. But then he would loose a unique feature of this website.

linuxworks said:

I ask again, of the DPR web admin staff, please consider adding an
ignore list as a feature for this website.

it would solve so many problems. rather than letting some troll get
on your nerves, you should be able to simply 'hide' their text and
posts. its simple and most websites that have forums have kill-files
or ignore lists.

most of us get along but for those that can't play nice, ignore lists
might be one solution.

phil et al: please do consider adding this feature. its long overdue.

(in theory, you could implement this as a firefox plugin, at the
client side; but then only those that run that user-agent would be
able to benefit. much better to have it at server-side, so everyone
can use it.)

--
Bryan
(pic stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/linux-works ) ~

Click to expand...

I'm glad that you'd allow collective posters, that's just brilliant. But then one can see why you feel safer in the pack.
--
-------------------------------------------------------
My Galleries: http://webs.ono.com/igonzalezbordes/index.html

PhotoTraveler said:

Ok, so if they had this feature, and they had you on their ignore
list. Then you would have posted this, and they would have never
seen your post. So you keep posting it time and time again?

Click to expand...

1. Who is "they"? If a few people don't see you, how would you even know? And even if you did, why would you repost over and over again??? What, you have some innate right that everyone MUST see your post?

PhotoTraveler said:

Block/Ignore list disrupt information.

Click to expand...

80 posts above, and people still don't get the individual nature of ignore lists. How is MY NOT READING someone's post a "disruption of information"? Again, someone has an innate right that forces me to read his posts? How is that different from my just skipping someone's post? Should I be required to read the post lest it be reposted over and over again?

PhotoTraveler said:

So you block a few people. Then you start reading threads, and
you find their is threads that don't make much sense. You don't
understand where people are coming from.

Click to expand...

Why are you so concerned with my not understanding what I see?

PhotoTraveler said:

The vastly better solution is the moderation and moderator alert
of problem posters. Let the problem be fixed globally.

Click to expand...

Again, why do people hate individual choice so much? Does government have to solve everything for everyone? Besides, if moderation worked so well, we wouldn't be having this discussion, now would we?

PhotoTraveler said:

Some of the worst posters and those we would like to go away
are the most prevalent posters. Start ignoring them and threads
look like swiss cheese and can't be followed.

Click to expand...

Again, why are you so concerned about my choices? Does someone force you to use my ignore list? Why can't people mind their own business?

PhotoTraveler said:

onlooker said:

Block/Ignore list disrupt information.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

onlooker said:

80 posts above, and people still don't get the individual nature of
ignore lists. How is MY NOT READING someone's post a "disruption of
information"?

Click to expand...

Say you post a question and I know the answer...I spend 10 minutes writing out a detailed reply to your question, but wait, I'm on your ignore list so you never see my reply. No one else knows the answer, and then you complain because no one knows the answer.

Not only have you by having me on your ignore list "disrupted information", but more importantly I wasted my time trying to help you and you will never see it!!!

onlooker said:

How is that different from my just skipping someone's
post?

Click to expand...

The difference is you see my reply to your question...now you could still ignore my post, but you are making a choice on that particular post, whereas if you put me on an ignore list you never see my post to make the choice.

onlooker said:

Should I be required to read the post lest it be reposted over and over again?

Click to expand...

Well, if no one else replied to your question, and then a while later you decide to post in another forum and again I'm the only one with the answer so I copy & paste my response from the other reply to try and get your attention, but again it won't be seen by you!

onlooker said:

Why are you so concerned with my not understanding what I see?

Click to expand...

Because you will then post a question that has already been answered by me in a thread, but you won't see that reply because you blocked me, even if I reply to you again in the same thread telling you to look at the other reply!

So the ignored ones are the most helpful ones, huh? You're kidding, right? So far I have looked back through the posting history of a couple of people I would ignore. I did not find a single post worth reading.

If someone else is in a habit of ignoring good contributors, it's their choice. Other readers benefit from good posts. This is not an email exchange, it's a public forum.

But, as I said before, it's my choice to read or not read someone's posts. Do not presume your have some kind of right to force me otherwise. I am amazed that people even bring that up. All we're discussing is a method of making that process simpler.

Michael_J said:

Adverse Camber said:

Michael_J said:

Adverse Camber said:

...and it should be public. Why not a tag on each post showing the
complaints made against it. Then at least the wider audience could
make up their own mind about whether the complaints were justified. I
remember the case of joe mama where a subsequent poll showed that 96%
thought that the ban should be rescinded. One vote said otherwise,
though, and it was the vote with the power.
In the end, thinking up more sensible solutions has no value unless
the mods are inclined to be sensible.

Click to expand...

Tag the "offending" post. AND have a stat showing how many time a
poster has hit the complaint button. It would show the offenders and
the forum nannies.

Example:
Jane Doe - 244 posts, 5 threads started, has hit the complaint button
649,211 times.

Click to expand...

Hi, Malcolm,
I think that should be 'Debbie Doe'.

Adverse

Click to expand...

You had to have some history here and do some snooping to come up
with that. Or do you and Doe hang together in South Park? \;-)

Click to expand...

Could it be that you actually miss 'Jane Doe'? Otherwise, why would you 'call' for her, every time she hasn't been around for a few days! And btw, Brian has thrown in the towel, so the way is open now, to the very top of the overall leaderboard!

Steen Bay said:

Michael_J said:

Adverse Camber said:

Michael_J said:

Adverse Camber said:

...and it should be public. Why not a tag on each post showing the
complaints made against it. Then at least the wider audience could
make up their own mind about whether the complaints were justified. I
remember the case of joe mama where a subsequent poll showed that 96%
thought that the ban should be rescinded. One vote said otherwise,
though, and it was the vote with the power.
In the end, thinking up more sensible solutions has no value unless
the mods are inclined to be sensible.

Click to expand...

Tag the "offending" post. AND have a stat showing how many time a
poster has hit the complaint button. It would show the offenders and
the forum nannies.

Example:
Jane Doe - 244 posts, 5 threads started, has hit the complaint button
649,211 times.

Click to expand...

Hi, Malcolm,
I think that should be 'Debbie Doe'.

Adverse

Click to expand...

You had to have some history here and do some snooping to come up
with that. Or do you and Doe hang together in South Park? \;-)

Click to expand...

Could it be that you actually miss 'Jane Doe'? Otherwise, why would
you 'call' for her, every time she hasn't been around for a few days!
And btw, Brian has thrown in the towel, so the way is open now, to
the very top of the overall leaderboard!

Click to expand...

What would Batman be without the Joker?
390 posts in 7 days?! It can't be done!
Besides, there are 11 people ahead of me - I'll let one of them take over.

--
People who claim to be open minded never see it my way.

onlooker said:

So the ignored ones are the most helpful ones, huh? You're kidding,
right? So far I have looked back through the posting history of a
couple of people I would ignore. I did not find a single post worth
reading.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I just struck me funny that you would take the time to go through the posting history of people you intend to ignore - and then say; "reading moronic posts wastes people's time."

But, hey, it's your time to waste. Thanks for the chuckle.

onlooker said:

If someone else is in a habit of ignoring good contributors, it's
their choice. Other readers benefit from good posts. This is not an
email exchange, it's a public forum.

But, as I said before, it's my choice to read or not read someone's
posts. Do not presume your have some kind of right to force me
otherwise. I am amazed that people even bring that up. All we're
discussing is a method of making that process simpler.

Click to expand...

What could be more simple than glancing at a post and moving on without having to click anything?

--
People who claim to be open minded never see it my way.

PhotoTraveler said:

Ok, so if they had this feature, and they had you on their ignore
list.

Click to expand...

stop. that's not how it would work. 'they' have only the framework; the data comes from the user, edited by the user, deleted by the user. the webserver only allows the user to manage the killfile and then applies what they set, to their own browsing experience.

I really can't see why anyone would object to allowing automated 'hiding' of posts. considering a post to be so-called 'atomic'; you either show the whole post or you don't show that post to that user, when he refreshes or calls up a web page. and so when a user at home asks for the thread on a topic, the webserver would apply the filtering of the thread to the user's 'preference' criteria. you take a big thing, filter out the bits you know you don't want, then you take that result and send it over the network to the remote home user/browser.

PhotoTraveler said:

Then you would have posted this, and they would have never seen
your post. So you keep posting it time and time again?

Click to expand...

it does happen that if you have enough 'holes' in a thread, it starts to either look odd or make less sense. a placeholder could be put in where filtered material used to be (just one idea, off the top of my head). but again - realize that this is only what YOU see - everyone has a different (possibly) set of filters and so what you see is not always what others see.

then again, the piping of banner ads is already an engine like that - what you see is not always what the other guy browsing the web is seeing. its just how the web is - its dynamic, even down to the browsing level (browser add-ons are one example).

PhotoTraveler said:

Block/Ignore list disrupt information.

So you block a few people. Then you start reading threads, and you
find their is threads that don't make much sense. You don't
understand where people are coming from. The reason is people are
responding to what you don't see. If you respond in that not knowing
what was all being said, you then make an even bigger mess of things
for those who have nothing blocked, as now your post is very
confusing.

Click to expand...

this could happen. if you block a 'key' component of the thread (like, even the OP, lol) then the thread you see, as a filtered resultant, is not making sense and seeming very incomplete.

so what do you do? do you realize that you just blocked something 'important'? maybe there's a long-term semi-static list that you keep and then a transient quick hide/unhide that you can use to unblock things ('open your eyes') and see what all the fuss was about in that there thread and if you change your mind and now 'see the light', you could be able to go to that semi-static list and unblock the bloke

it can be made to work. it should serve the user and make it easier and less 'offensive' for him/her to browse. put power at the very very endpoint and hopefully you need less and less blocking in the middle...

PhotoTraveler said:

Once again, I think more folks need to embrace the simplicity of the
DPR forum design. Adding more features is not good. Simpler is
better. Phil could definitely sell/license his forum code if he
wanted with lots of takers. But then he would loose a unique feature
of this website.

Click to expand...

if you choose not to use a feature like this, then you do nothing and its default disposition is 'pass all'. for those that might want it, they'd go into a control panel, check some boxes, maybe fill in some names and even wildcards and then say 'apply'. then they get less 'junk' (in their opinion, which is the only real one that counts) sent all the way, server to browser, across the world and many wan/lan links.

think of the ch^H^Hbits !

--
Bryan
(pic stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/linux-works ) ~