Ignore List of Thread Starter keeps Ignored from Posting in Thread

[Elok]

Assuming you're serious, Kid, passive-aggressive means acting against someone without direct defiance or opposition. In this case, I suspect the ignore/block policy would have led to a chain reaction of spiteful, retaliatory ignores, ignores simply to shut down someone who said something unpleasant in one's thread (i.e., ignores simply to "win" by default), and so on.

[Kidlicious]

Assuming you're serious, Kid, passive-aggressive means acting against someone without direct defiance or opposition. In this case, I suspect the ignore/block policy would have led to a chain reaction of spiteful, retaliatory ignores, ignores simply to shut down someone who said something unpleasant in one's thread (i.e., ignores simply to "win" by default), and so on.

Passive-aggressive behavior is usually exhibited within a group setting to get others, including authority, to be hostile towards the target.

[Ben Kenobi]

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

Poly's been down this road before.

[Ben Kenobi]

Ideally we would just eject BK and/or Kid

Perhaps ideal to you, Elok. You've said some pretty awful things. Including asserting that I'm not a person. Not sure why you feel that you haven't contributed to the problem. You seem pretty gung ho when you think it's other people being banned to suit you. That might not be a road you want to head down yourself.

[giblets]

I seriously doubt that Elok claimed you're not a person. I'd call you a liar but this is probably just another one of your delusions.

[Ben Kenobi]

I seriously doubt that Elok claimed you're not a person.

Yeah he did.

Remember, BK is basically a Dementor, only instead of sucking all the happiness out of an area he sucks out the intelligent conversation.

For someone who wants intelligent conversation... this isn't really the way to accomplish it.

[giblets]

Yeah he did.



For someone who wants intelligent conversation... this isn't really the way to accomplish it.

He didn't mean that you're literally a fictional creature from the Harry Potter books. Somehow you're even more literal minded than someone with asperger's.

[Aeson]

Also, ClaudetteW only has 1 post on the forum and I already can't post in his/her thread.

They learn fast ...

[Ben Kenobi]

Not my DL.

[DaShi]

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...

Unfortunately, that doesn't appear to be the case. But under my proposal the vote threshold would be rather high. Only the most egregious offenders should be affected.

[-Jrabbit]

Unfortunately, that doesn't appear to be the case. But under my proposal the vote threshold would be rather high. Only the most egregious offenders should be affected.

So if I refuse to play your reindeer games, I'm disenfranchised? Yeah, that's fair.
Or are we required to vote before posting in a thread? Fvck that.

Don't get me wrong; I appreciate that you're trying to address the issue. But fvck that.

[Main_Brain]

Still on the Fence wheter its harder to be hated or be ignored.

[kentonio]

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

MINGPOCALYPSE!!!!

[PLATO]

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

Coming to a theater near you soon: The Return to Mingapulco

[dannubis]

Did he mellow with old age ?