“Nah, I’ve got balls that need scratching. It’s a better use of my time.”
I understand what Colibri has said, but is it really an insult? Surely, it’s more a statement of fact. If you were to say ‘na-na, you’re on my ignore list. I can’t hear you you, and I don’t want to - so there’, that could be construed as an insult. But stating the fact is just information, isn’t it?
If you consider the size of posts some of the more, shall we say passionate members contribute. Simply saying “I didn’t see it” could seem a bit disingenious.
And as Nine To The Sky points out, a third party could ask you to look, or even link to it. It then looks like you have three options.
1: You say “I can’t see his post.” This reveals that poster is on your ignore list.
2: You say “I won’t read his post.” Thus making yourself seem ignorant, probably true for me:)
3: You PM someone to send you a copy of his post. Again this reveals (to the recipient of the PM at least) that poster is on your ignore.
Also I’m sorry Colibri, but it’s OK for people to know who’s on your ignore list - but it’s not OK to tell people who’s on it? Or am I reading this wrong and you mean it’s OK for you to tell a third party about someone on your list, but not the person in question? Either way sounds iffy.
Or you take the poster off your ignore list, read his post, and then put him back on again. Which means you have to read his post, which is presumably the last thing you want to do.
I really think this is not one of the best rules on the Dope.
:smack:The simple answers are really the best aren’t they.
Consider my ignore-ance at least partially fought.
Sorry couldn’t resist.
It is, however, the truth.
If you wish to address the points made by the ignored poster, you can view their post and respond. Otherwise, you can tell the people pushing you to respond that you aren’t interested in doing so.
You can view posts by ignored posters without taking them off of your ignore list. There’s a separately link you can click to display their post.
Or ignore the people telling you to respond to somebody on your ignore list.
Regards,
Shodan
Don’t worry, the warning marks next to your name are not as significant as you think they are. If you ever get banned it will be for something specific and not because you accrued a certain number of warnings.
Trust me, I have a collection. I’ve been suspended twice, and while they cited the warnings as being relevant to my suspension, they were not at all, they were just extra justification for the mods to do what they were going to do anyway.
Just to be clear I don’t feel like the mods were out of line suspending me either time, I’m just pointing out that the warnings were not the reasons for my suspension.
Mods warn people all the time.
You’ve been suspended twice and not permanently banned? Damn, you must have a partial copy of Liberal’s golden ticket or something. Shit man, how much will it run me to get in on that action? I assume it’ll have something to do with virgin Wiccan or hippie chicks huh? Or do you prefer experienced Wiccan or hippie chicks?
The “information” you are communicating is that you consider every one of the poster’s remarks to be worthless or obnoxious and not worth reading. So pretty much by it’s very nature it’s an insult.
Context does matter. However, the present instance excepted, I can’t recall any case in which a poster revealed someone else was on their ignore list in which their main intent was not to be insulting or disparaging to the poster in question.
You can tell people whatever you want about who is on your ignore list in the Pit. You just can’t do it in other forums.
No one ever said the Ignore List was convenient. Even before I was a moderator, I never considered putting someone on my Ignore List since it seemed easier just to scroll by someone’s posts. (Moderators are not allowed to put anyone on Ignore.) But if you want to block someone out automatically, you have to live with the inconvenience that other people are reading and responding to them.
Huh! We’ll see about that!
I am pretty sure I am on the ignore list of someone in this thread 
Agreed. It’s a point that has been raised in other threads with similar topics and under similar circumstances. A mod has yet directly to address it, so far as I can recall. The fact is that in this forum, the rules should apply across the board — the whole board, including the mods and admins. We can’t be snarky and insulting to them, and they can’t be snarky and insulting to us. That’s how it oughta be.
(Incidentally, I will PM you about The Aesthetical Jesus. Probably within the next couple of days.)
First, individual circumstances are different. The number of allowable suspensions depends on the nature of the offenses and the time period between suspensions. When there’s four or five years of good behavior (no infractions) between suspensions, we tend to be lenient.
Second, the accusation that anyone has some sort of “golden ticket” is ludicrous, if not insulting. The lines are often fairly thin, and those who stay on the appropriate side of the line, don’t stack up warnings. Just because you (generic you) don’t like someone (or their politics or attitude or whatever) doesn’t mean they’ve broken any rules, and doesn’t mean they have any sort of immunity.
Finally, I’m not quite sure whether the question of whether you can “name names” in ATMB has been answered. Clearly, the answer is yes, as long as it’s done in a civil and non-insulting manner. “So-and-so posted [link]” or "Wossname said
[quote]
" etc is fine. “Wossname was a jerk when she said…” or “I’m ignoring So-and-so” is not. A comment like “Tut-tut-tut broke the rules here” – it depends, dunnit. If the mod already gave a warning or comment to that effect, then OK; if that’s just your (generic you) opinion, then you’re junior modding.
The mods pretty much agree that naming who is in your Ignore List is pretty much an insult, no matter how you cut it. I’ve never heard of, “I love what he says about politics, so I’ve put him on my ignore list.”
Dex
I wonder whether you would mind addressing the issue that Mr Dibble has raised in this thread. I quoted it and commented on it. And it has been raised here and there in other threads too, but has always been drowned out by the noise of other things — like the ignore list and such.
The issue is whether mods and admins ought not to be subject to the same rules regarding snark and insults IN THIS PARTICULAR FORUM that the members are subject to.
That’s what we’d like you to address. We know that you want a forum where civil discussion can take place about board issues, but for that to materialize it must be a two-way street. It shouldn’t be too difficult for mods to restrain themselves to a “just the facts, ma’am” behavior here, even if it is during the issuing of a caution or warning.
Thanks,
Lib
Lib,
I don’t have a problem with discussing whatever you want to discuss, but I think you’ve mischaracterized what Mr. D said:
Which suggests a more lenient standard for posters in atmb.
It was you who raised the other issue:
Not that it’s a big deal or anything.
So what if, for instance, I say to someone “I’m just ignoring you from here on.” meaning that I’m disengaging from dealing with a particular user in a thread while not leaving the thread, and subsequently put that person on my ignore list. Am I going to face possible repercussions there, if someone throws a flag, or do we specifically have to say “I’m putting you on my ignore list!” or mention “[username] is on my ignore list” to run afoul of the rule?
I’m just trying to understand, because I’m sure I tiptoed around this regarding a particular user in some of the contentious healthcare debates of late.
My interpretation of the rule is that it would not be a violation.