A change to block/ignore

[lucusloc]

Currently if you block/ignore someone it not only hides their content from you, it also hides your content from them. It should not do this, if they do not wish to see your content they have a block/ignore button of their own. If your content is hidden from them it can make it more difficult for them to continue participating in conversations that other people are having on the topic, as they will be missing half the context of that conversation. This allows someone to fragment small sections of the community without the consent of other members by making certain conversations almost entirely opaque to the blocked member. This should not be a possible function of the block/ignore feature, and for this reason I think that that feature should be one way only. If you block/ignore someone you will not see their content, but they will still have full visibility of yours. They will still be able to quote and interact with that content in order to participate in the conversation with other members, but you will not be alerted to or see any of that content (including not being able to see their quotes by other members, just as it works now). This would reduce the power of the ignore button to fragment the community and would reduce the impact on the blocked user.

For those that like not seeing the content of those that have ignored them, there could be an "automatically ignore back" option on the user profile that would maintain the current functionality.

Read More

 

[Mikej]

We were just -10, and now we've had two deserters bring us to -8.

That means.....-10, or -8 are people that disagree with the original post? Are we talking "Hell Yeah's" and "Hell NO's"? Agree/ disagree?

And who are "WE"?

Too confusing. I don't know who what I'm voting for. So for that reason, I'm out!

 

[lucusloc]

If you require a visual; my 0-1" outside micrometer could measure it without having to move the spindle a full rotation.

 

[DB is Here]

Too confusing. I'd know who what I'd vote for.

It's the delta between those for vs. against changing how it's currently done. Also, if you watch the 1st season of Seinfeld, you'll totally get what just happened.

 

[MTpockets]

The Clicking Clique of Critiques meeting is in session....

My name is MTpockets and I am a critic of critical critiquing.
For more than one voting cycle, I have been less than agreeable with those inside my ignore-zone.
Let's begin this meeting with a moment of ignorance for all who have fallen victim to silencing by the critical clicking of the cliques.

 

[solv3nt]

That means.....-10, or -8 are people that disagree with the original post? Are we talking "Hell Yeah's" and "Hell NO's"? Agree/ disagree?

And who are "WE"?

Too confusing. I don't know who what I'm voting for. So for that reason, I'm out!

A for vote means you agree with @lucusloc and a vote against, we're back to -8, means he rants too much.

 

[OldBroad44]

This is a modification from idea put forth by the comedian Gallagher. We should all have dart guns and when you see a driver so something stupid we just shoot a dart that sticks to the car. Then the cops can just go around and ticket the cars with all the darts. I see the benefit

Once upon a time when my family lived in Florida and had a boat, there was a trick used by boaters against fellow boaters who were rude or unsafe on the water. Such as running too fast in a harbors area, or going fast near smaller boats and casting a huge wake that threatened them with turning over. Or running through or too near an anchored boats fishing spot and scaring away the fish so they have to lift anchor and move. The trick was to open the two ends of a raw egg and blow out the egg. Then fill the egg with black paint and tape over the ends. When another boat does something rude, illegal, or dangerous, you throw the egg. The rude boaters come back to harbor with a huge black blot on their bow, and everyone looks at them with unfriendly eyes. (And since its Florida they dont try to sink you in retaliation because you probably have a gun with you and coulda done and could do a whole lot worse than a paint mark.) Then the rude guys have to take the time to repaint their boat to remove the blot of shame.

 

[Unka-Boo]

Could just disable the the ignore feature altogether and let people implode...

 

[lucusloc]

Could just disable the the ignore feature altogether and let people implode...

I mean, if people were asking what my actual preference is that would be it. Learn to communicate like an adult and not get so emotionally invested in an online forum that you can't handle seeing dissenting opinion or even trolling. At that point we just leave it to the mods to clean up actual violating content like spam and abuse. But I recognize I am in the minority for most places and standard practice is to let people mute content they do not like. My only ask, at this point, is to not force that content filter on me when I do not appreciate it.

 

[lucusloc]

Once upon a time when my family lived in Florida and had a boat, there was a trick used by boaters against fellow boaters who were rude or unsafe on the water. Such as running too fast in a harbors area, or going fast near smaller boats and casting a huge wake that threatened them with turning over. Or running through or too near an anchored boats fishing spot and scaring away the fish so they have to lift anchor and move. The trick was to open the two ends of a raw egg and blow out the egg. Then fill the egg with black paint and tape over the ends. When another boat does something rude, illegal, or dangerous, you throw the egg. The rude boaters come back to harbor with a huge black blot on their bow, and everyone looks at them with unfriendly eyes. (And since its Florida they dont try to sink you in retaliation because you probably have a gun with you and coulda done and could do a whole lot worse than a paint mark.) Then the rude guys have to take the time to repaint their boat to remove the blot of shame.

I wonder what the ramifications of making all our "blocking/blocked by" filters publicly available would be? Like, would that make cliques stronger or weaker? On the one hand there could be bandwagoning, where a popular user can ostracize people by just adding them to the block list and having the rest of their clique copy it, but it would also make it easy to spot the thin-skinned among us and kinda take the piss out of them for having a giant list of people they can't handle seeing.

 

[Nosferatu]

I just want to be able to block myself. I already know what I said, I don't need to read it again.

 

[lucusloc]

I just want to be able to block myself. I already know what I said, I don't need to read it again.

Holy hell that would be terrible for me. I have to go back and reread my stuff just to fix all the typos.

 

[Joe13]

Sorry if this offends anyone, but this reads like "I wasn't popular in high school and I feel like it's happening again"

It's been my experience unless you have a mass majority of people asking for some thing it's way too difficult to change things on a website like this so it isn't gonna happen.

 

[Nosferatu]

Holy hell that would be terrible for me. I have to go back and reread my stuff just to fix all the typos.

You'll be able to see them in your incognito browser session while you're reading all the posts from the people that blocked you.

 

[FATAL125]

Who's offended, that someone's offended, that someone got offended, about no one getting offended, by someone taking offense...

 

[solv3nt]

-11, nine more to go.

 

[FATAL125]

-11, nine more to go.

Can I vote for myself and 8 of my friends...?

They're all imaginary... but they're real to me.

 

[Nosferatu]

Can I vote for myself and 8 of my friends...?

They're all imaginary... but they're real to me.

So voting Democrat?

 

[FATAL125]

So voting Democrat?

 

[Cavedweller]

...I think that that feature should be one way only. If you block/ignore someone you will not see their content, but they will still have full visibility of yours. They will still be able to quote and interact with that content in order to participate in the conversation with other members, but you will not be alerted to or see any of that content (including not being able to see their quotes by other members, just as it works now). This would reduce the power of the ignore button to fragment the community and would reduce the impact on the blocked user.

I seem to recall that in the older versions of the site the ignore feature functioned in the manner you desire. It was with the last "upgrade" that it changed to block in both directions. I could be wrong, but that's how I misremember it.

Another point I just remembered; incognito does not work in the Den, you have to be a paid and logged in member to see that. Even direct links do not work.

Seems to me there shouldn't be any ignoring allowed in the place that shall not be discussed. If you've made it that far, you should have a thicker skin.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

Could just disable the the ignore feature altogether and let people implode...

Dare to dream my friend!

Sadly, AFAIK Apple and Google require "social media" apps to have a block feature, now you might say that NWFA isn't "social media" but I would bet that Apple and Google aren't going get overly pedantic about the difference