Interesting and much-needed feature. Wondering what it would take for you guys to ignore all posts by a poster?
For me,
"[Buckminster Fuller]I would have wanted to marry him...he and I are on the same wavelength...visionary."





Interesting and much-needed feature. Wondering what it would take for you guys to ignore all posts by a poster?
For me,
"[Buckminster Fuller]I would have wanted to marry him...he and I are on the same wavelength...visionary."
We talked about this in one of the stickies. I like it, most people seem to be against it.
Oh and the person(s) I've chosen to ignore 1) bring no value to my CU experience and/or 2) harp the same messages without care for who they offend along the way.
I don't think I would ever put anyone on ignore. I mean If I think someone is bitter, overly creative, an asshole, or an extremest it just words and conversation. Nothing I will get bent out of shape over But I am not easily offended at all it takes a lot to make me blush as well.
It's good to have I suppose for people that would prefer to block nonsense. I would not say I am against because if you don't want to deal with a particular person then it just makes you're reading easier.
But now you have made me wonder what would push me to such a point that I could never tolerate to see words from someone lolz
[this is in response to Paul, I took too long typing it]
I have to say, that post made me "favorite" the thread. She's actually a really interesting poet, it's amazing how well she represents herself just through small and oblique phrases like that.
That quote in particular caused me to picture her standing in a backyard in spring, spinning in circles for forty minutes. The gauzy robes she wears are flying outward, away from her, slapping against themselves in the breeze. She is barefoot, and the action of her feet pivoting is forming a lazily-growing circle of dirt where the grass has been pulled up. Her first act after stopping is to brush her hair out of her eyes, proudly smiling at her accomplishment, and then she's going to go eat some Special K. It is seven in the morning.
I would use it.. Probably not as a long term solution, but a good way to take a break from a poster's incessant nattering...
What I would like to see is an "Ignore Thread" function. I think I would end up using that a lot more.
I wouldn't normally use it - but can you turn it on and off? I could see using it for posters who have a track record of saying nothing of value. I'd love to see a most ignored list at the end of 2009.
michaelcoyote wrote >>
I would use it.. Probably not as a long term solution, but a good way to take a break from a poster's incessant nattering...
What I would like to see is an "Ignore Thread" function. I think I would end up using that a lot more.
Wouldn't that be the same as just choosing not to click on a thread whose topic you have no interest in?
lifeontwowheels wrote >>
michaelcoyote wrote >>
I would use it.. Probably not as a long term solution, but a good way to take a break from a poster's incessant nattering...
What I would like to see is an "Ignore Thread" function. I think I would end up using that a lot more.Wouldn't that be the same as just choosing not to click on a thread whose topic you have no interest in?
No, because it would no longer pollute my top ten, and I might actually see a thread I want to see and participate in. Depending on the day I could imagine this opening up 4-5 slots for stuff I want to see..
joev wrote >>
I wouldn't normally use it - but can you turn it on and off? I could see using it for posters who have a track record of saying nothing of value. I'd love to see a most ignored list at the end of 2009.
You can unignore people in your "edit" tab on your profile page. So turning people off and on is fairly simple.
JimL2 wrote >>
[this is in response to Paul, I took too long typing it]
I have to say, that post made me "favorite" the thread. She's actually a really interesting poet, it's amazing how well she represents herself just through small and oblique phrases like that.
That quote in particular caused me to picture her standing in a backyard in spring, spinning in circles for forty minutes. The gauzy robes she wears are flying outward, away from her, slapping against themselves in the breeze. She is barefoot, and the action of her feet pivoting is forming a lazily-growing circle of dirt where the grass has been pulled up. Her first act after stopping is to brush her hair out of her eyes, proudly smiling at her accomplishment, and then she's going to go eat some Special K. It is seven in the morning.
haha, well I didn't read this at first-read because I thought it was kinda too long so i kind of breezed by it, but then I heard Walker laughing, so of course I want to know what he was laughing about and he said Jim's post so I said oh, guess I need to go back and read it. Thanks for the laughs Walker, I mean Jim. :)
I'd love to see a most ignored list at the end of 2009.
BTW, We won't be publishing that info. The ignore feature is to give people an option to quietly move on. A Most Ignored List would kind of defeat the point.
Walker wrote >>
michaelcoyote wrote >>
No, because it would no longer pollute my top ten, and I might actually see a thread I want to see and participate in. Depending on the day I could imagine this opening up 4-5 slots for stuff I want to see..
I don't see this in my normal forum view... Plus i couldn't be bothered to click on the teeny tiny link even if i couldn't find it :-p
I'm just saying it would be nice to pertinently "de-pollute" my view of "hey guys we should totally turn city center into a driving range" or "ZOMG I <3 dreadlocks" type threads without totally ignoring a poster who might occasionally have something interesting or useful to say. Shit, I had this ability in my netnews reader back in 95.
And really, if anyone should be for this, you should Walker...
I understand your reason for wanting it. Let me think a bit more about how it would impact things and get a few other things fixed first.
The difference is that you were using a standalone client for Usenet, instead of telneting directly into the NNTP server and reading the posts. All threading/ignoring/formatting was done client-side, which given the circumstances only makes sense.
So. Why don't you just set up an RSS reader-client to screen-scrape all new topics on the site? (Unless there's already a master-RSS feed that links all the new RSS feeds. Or whatever.*) Now that there's one feed for every topic, you can just delete feeds of topics you don't like, and you won't have to see them any more.*
Bing bang boom. I'm a genius.*
*I think RSS is dumb and never use its clients, so maybe this is unworkable.
JimL2 wrote >>
The difference is that you were using a standalone client for Usenet, instead of telneting directly into the NNTP server and reading the posts. All threading/ignoring/formatting was done client-side, which given the circumstances only makes sense.
Sorry Jim, but your analogy sucks because the NNTP server was not building a news view for me every time I get my news. It was just a dumb server that would hand over the news it had on hand.. Web based forum software does build a view for each user every time. If I drew your suggestion to it's logical conclusion it would be as if someone had implemented per user only killfiles on the server leaving the subject killfiles for the client.. which seems a bit weird, no?
actually, fuck thread ignores, just give the forum a NNTP front end and i'll just read it with trn or slrn if i'm feelin' fancy.....
....goddamn kids... get offa my lawn... why back in my day we had to smash rocks together to get zero
I don't think I would ignore anyone on this board, at least not yet. I ignore someone on another board I'm on because he always posts the most ignorant and inflammatory things. I found myself unable to resist using my time to reply. Ignoring him saves me frustration and time.
Any word on this being an option?
Yeah Walker...we've had a real special crop of assclowns pop up lately...would be nice if I could stop seeing them :)
You must log in to post.