- Joined
- 28 May 2004
- Posts
- 10,892
- Reactions
- 5,384
The general posts shouldn't appear in the right hand recent posts section.
I'm trying to develop a solution to give people the choice of whether or not to have General Chat showing up in both "New Posts" and "Latest Forum Posts".
Better to give people more choice than less IMO. Just going to take a little more coding.
It already shows in "last post" at the thread link, I'd leave it at that if I were you.
Investors don't want to see the ravings that go on in general chat IMHO.
Some of them might. You certainly participate in some of those ravings yourself. More choice is better than less choice.
............ anyone who, after being informed that they have been placed on someone's ignore list.................
Is the person I place on my ignore list automatically advised of this?
Some of them might. You certainly participate in some of those ravings yourself. More choice is better than less choice.
Is the person I place on my ignore list automatically advised of this?
Cheers
Country Lad
Joe, have you considered the possibility of such public advice of a member being placed on another member's Ignore list?No, but I am willing to act as an intermediary if you would like them informed for some reason.
Joe, have you considered the possibility of such public advice of a member being placed on another member's Ignore list?
Whilst I can see some usefulness in that, I suspect the overall downside would be even greater divisiveness than presently exists. It would also possibly provoke some people driven largely by spite to use such a facility.
The difficulty I see with the Ignore function is that one cannot see derogatory posts by the person on Ignore, thus eliminating the capacity to refute such comments.
You suggest it's up to the person on Ignore to cease making such comments. How is this going to happen if they either don't know they're on Ignore, or simply choose to keep on with their provocation?
Ultimately it gets to the point where in some threads it's just not worth the trouble to even attempt to participate.
.................but sometimes the ignore list is a better option than allowing the conflict or angst to continue.
I have put Whiskers on ignore, but like Julia said, it's a worry how he is responding to one's posts. So I have clicked on "view post" and find he continues to reply to my posts which were not initially directed at him. My annoyed responses were. Maybe I should consider keeping out for a while.
I cant see the point in the ignore function, if someone is particularly offensive the should be banned for a week or 2 then permanently if they persist apart from that just ignore their posts, same as spam, just delete, no problem.
To me, that is the point of the ignore function. We have some members who revert to name calling and abuse at the drop of a hat who would be banned for a while on any other forum.
Seeing that totally unacceptable behavior is allowed here, one thing I can do is trying to ignore these people by putting them on the ignore list. The other is to again leave this forum which I did for a number of years previously because there was virtually no moderation and that is tempting because I am already part of the alternatives.
Cheers
Country Lad
I find it good just not to waste time or be tempted to read some peoples' posts where I have no interest in their opinions.
Have you considered making a contribution with your own opinions?To me, that is the point of the ignore function. We have some members who revert to name calling and abuse at the drop of a hat who would be banned for a while on any other forum.
Seeing that totally unacceptable behavior is allowed here, one thing I can do is trying to ignore these people by putting them on the ignore list. The other is to again leave this forum which I did for a number of years previously because there was virtually no moderation and that is tempting because I am already part of the alternatives.
And that is the point I'm trying to make. One can ignore Whiskers, not read his rambling, verbose posts, and then make a comment about something unrelated, and immediately he's all over it, dissecting every word, including putting up dictionary definitions, and demanding a response. When such a demand is ignored, it gets repeated. Why would anyone keep trying to engage any sort of reasonable discussion in these circumstances?I have put Whiskers on ignore, but like Julia said, it's a worry how he is responding to one's posts. So I have clicked on "view post" and find he continues to reply to my posts which were not initially directed at him.
As above. You drop out also, following others.Maybe I should consider keeping out for a while.
Well, actually, no, it's not, Mr Burns. Joe explains below that :All you have to do is report it to Joe, problem fixed.
It's possible for someone to be conceited, arrogant, condescending, dogmatic, pompous, repetitive, overly verbose or to have opinions that you find distasteful but still not be breaking any forum rules.
Well, actually, no, it's not, Mr Burns. Joe explains below that :
conceited, arrogant, condescending, dogmatic, pompous, repetitive, overly verbose or to have opinions that you find distasteful but still not be breaking any forum rules.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?