Ignore List of Thread Starter keeps Ignored from Posting in Thread

[giblets]

How about under each poster's login is a list of the people they are ignoring? That's all they really want anyway.

How would that stop certain posters from ****ting all over threads with the same carp they spam in every thread?

[DaShi]

I don't like you challenging my premise. Ignore!!!

[Aeson]

There is a something for this, it's called Moderation.

Everybody *****ed about moderation, but it stopped these repeated threadjacks.

ACK

Yah, the problem with moderation being we need some moderators with the time and will to clean things up. The moderators we have now do a good job of what they've signed up to do, but it would dramatically increase the moderation load.

[Elok]

Is my crud-filter idea at all feasible?

[Aeson]

Given all the points raised in this thread and the voting, we will drop the mod.

I do think something needs to be done about the constant threadjacking of every thread into the set of repetitive arguments.

[Aeson]

Is my crud-filter idea at all feasible?

You had a lot of good points. I was going to address some of them. But the temporary filter doesn't seem to have an easy solution.

[DaShi]

How about a down vote system? If a poster get enough down votes from different posters within a thread, they are no longer able to post in that thread. This would stop disruptive posters without creating opportunities for personal vendettas. And this coming from a guy who loves his personal vendettas.

[-Jrabbit]

What we need is a Threadjack Command Center, dedicated to extracting threadjacked post sequences and creating new threads with them.
There could even be a Threadjack Subforum for the offending passages.

It would be complaint-driven. All we would need is one mod with no other duties.

[Aeson]

There is a something for this, it's called Moderation.

Everybody *****ed about moderation, but it stopped these repeated threadjacks.

ACK

Changing the rules and having more active moderation is a possibility. None of the admins/moderators signed up for that, so we'd need to have volunteers to handle the workload. The current enforced rules are largely a product of no one wanting to or having the time to moderate the forum. Lorizael, MikeH, and Jon Miller did a good job with the limited time they could devote for a few years. But now they have even less time and/or have left.

[Aeson]

How about a down vote system? If a poster get enough down votes from different posters within a thread, they are no longer able to post in that thread. This would stop disruptive posters without creating opportunities for personal vendettas. And this coming from a guy who loves his personal vendettas.

It's a possibility. Though someone with a few DLs and/or a group of like-minded posters, could still wreck havoc.

[-Jrabbit]

How about a down vote system?

Some of us think it's possible to have on-topic discussions without resorting to votes, ratings, ignore, or thanks.

We may be dead wrong, but hey, a boy can dream...

[Aeson]

I think this will likely lead to massive amounts of passive-aggressive bull**** maneuvering far more disruptive than just having to scroll past pages of grey blocks and people arguing with said grey blocks. Ideally we would just eject BK and/or Kid, since that's what this is really all about. Spade a spade, and all that.

It is the crux of the issue, though there are other offenders (myself included) at various points in the spectrum.

I'd like to keep any moderator actions rule based and not poster specific.

EDIT: I, at least, use the ignore list for multiple purposes. There's people like BK and Kid who just thread**** without mercy, yes, but also posters I find kind of boring but don't feel the need to expunge from my presence entirely. And some in between. Just because a poster is boring or a bit of a heel to me personally doesn't mean they should be prevented from contributing to a general discussion.

It's a good point. The binary switch is too heavy handed.

[Ming]

There really is no need for extra mods... just a change in tactics. If the goal is to remove the thread jacking/repetitive arguments/name calling, it's really very simple.
Go to the source... and simple ban the offenders

[Kidlicious]

I think this will likely lead to massive amounts of passive-aggressive bull**** maneuvering far more disruptive than just having to scroll past pages of grey blocks and people arguing with said grey blocks. Ideally we would just eject BK and/or Kid, since that's what this is really all about. Spade a spade, and all that.

How about if we had a toggle-able feature to filter out ignored posters, and people quoting same, on a temporary basis? I.e. the bull**** simply doesn't appear. This would not be ideal, obviously, but it would allow the community of BK/Kid ignorers to conduct discussions with a minimum of disruption. I'm not sure if this is technologically feasible, just throwing it out there.

Also not sure why AAHZ is concerned about a vibrant forum culture in this respect, since aside from calling me a nerd his main contribution to said forum culture is egging on the idiots and making mock threats. This measure would likely increase drama. Then again, I'm not sure why he pretends to be twelve years younger and forty IQ points dumber than he really is. Who knows.

EDIT: I, at least, use the ignore list for multiple purposes. There's people like BK and Kid who just thread**** without mercy, yes, but also posters I find kind of boring but don't feel the need to expunge from my presence entirely. And some in between. Just because a poster is boring or a bit of a heel to me personally doesn't mean they should be prevented from contributing to a general discussion.

What's passive-aggressive?

[Aeson]

There really is no need for extra mods... just a change in tactics. If the goal is to remove the thread jacking/repetitive arguments/name calling, it's really very simple.
Go to the source... and simple ban the offenders

I suppose we could turn you loose ... I need to clean up my act first