# I \[object to\] Pit Rule #5 **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [February 24, 2009, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-object-to-pit-rule-5/487276 "2009-02-24T21:46:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Trepa\_Mayfield](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@Trepa\_Mayfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trepa_Mayfield)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-object-to-pit-rule-5/487276/1 "2009-02-24T21:46:44Z")
For those that just got here, that’s this: > [@](#): > > 1. The rule against telling people they’re on your “ignore” list has been rescinded in the Pit. Okay, why? Why was this necessary, or even wanted? The whole point of the ‘ignore’ function is to not have to deal with someone. Why bother with engaging with them. No point, really. All this will do is allow those of us who are emotionally immature to go ‘Na na, I can’t hear you’, which I think is rather annoying and obnoxious. Furthermore, this clashes with Ed’s goal to impose a > [@Ed Zotti](#): > > …minimum level of civility in the Pit… Why the inconsistency? Why is taunting people over ignoring them, something we were taught not to do at a young age, more civil than using a swear word, something most people have been using since the age of…young? For the record, I wholeheartedly agree with new rules 1, 3 and 4, and am glad you implemented them. #2…I’m not even going to go there. ---
**Author:** ![Trepa\_Mayfield](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@Trepa\_Mayfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trepa_Mayfield)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-object-to-pit-rule-5/487276/2 "2009-02-24T22:10:48Z")
Wait a second… :smack: I forgot this was supposed to go in ATMB. Could one of the mods please move it? ---
**Author:** ![Critical1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/3e96dc/32.png) [@Critical1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Critical1)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-object-to-pit-rule-5/487276/3 "2009-02-24T22:15:35Z")
I broke this rule kind of when I posted that I was putting someone on ignore in a thread that they werent even active in, so I can see no need for the rule in that case. in the case of just taunting someone with their being on your ignore list…well you can always add them to your own ignore list? ---
**Author:** ![jali](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ecae2f/32.png) [@jali](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jali)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-object-to-pit-rule-5/487276/4 "2009-02-24T22:17:27Z")
Just so that you know, I’m ignoring this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-object-to-pit-rule-5/487276/5 "2009-02-24T22:30:14Z")
> [@pedescribe](#): > > Wait a second… > > :smack: > > I forgot this was supposed to go in ATMB. > > Could one of the mods please move it? Moving, with edit to title. Colibri ---
**Author:** ![Smeghead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f1d935/32.png) [@Smeghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smeghead)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-object-to-pit-rule-5/487276/6 "2009-02-25T00:42:16Z")
> [@jali](#): > > Just so that you know, I’m ignoring this thread. You’ll need to start a separate thread in the Pit to inform us that you’re ignoring this one. Politely. ---
**Author:** ![hajario](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hajario/32/171_2.png) [@hajario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hajario)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-object-to-pit-rule-5/487276/7 "2009-02-25T01:35:48Z")
Maybe Ed thought that he was throwing us a bone or something. It’s a pretty silly rule but in the end it doesn’t bother me too much either way. Were there really that many people complaining about not being able to tell people that they were on ignore? ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 8:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-object-to-pit-rule-5/487276/8 "2009-02-25T08:46:06Z")
> [@hajario](#): > > Maybe Ed thought that he was throwing us a bone or something. It’s a pretty silly rule but in the end it doesn’t bother me too much either way. Were there really that many people complaining about not being able to tell people that they were on ignore? I agree completely with the OP and said so in another thread. When I have usually seen it come up it has been in a pit of a poster where someone else comes in and says they have the pittee on ignore so it doesn’t matter what they say. To me being told I am on someones ignore list is a bigger insult than being called an asshole. You are telling someone that you not only completely dismiss anything they say you have your fingers in your ears and refuse to listen. If you want to ignore someone do it quietly. Don’t taunt them with it knowing that they can’t respond to you. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-object-to-pit-rule-5/487276/9 "2009-02-27T03:32:29Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > If you want to ignore someone do it quietly. Don’t taunt them with it knowing that they can’t respond to you. Right and better yet, don’t taunt them with it knowing that _you can’t respond to them_. This sort of information isn’t especially wise to disclose. ---
**Author:** ![SciFiSam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/47e85d/32.png) [@SciFiSam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SciFiSam)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2009, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-object-to-pit-rule-5/487276/10 "2009-02-28T21:36:38Z")
I think it’s sensible. You can make it clear that the reason you’re not responding to someone is that they’re on ignore, not just that you can’t answer their questions. You can end an argument by pointing out that you simply _can’t_ respond to them any more. ---
**Author:** ![Ed\_Zotti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/fbc32d/32.png) [@Ed\_Zotti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ed_Zotti)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-object-to-pit-rule-5/487276/11 "2009-03-02T21:01:03Z")
> [@pedescribe](#): > > Okay, why? Why was this necessary, or even wanted? The whole point of the ‘ignore’ function is to not have to deal with someone. Why bother with engaging with them. No point, really. All this will do is allow those of us who are emotionally immature to go ‘Na na, I can’t hear you’, which I think is rather annoying and obnoxious. Furthermore, this clashes with Ed’s goal to impose a > Why the inconsistency? Why is taunting people over ignoring them, something we were taught not to do at a young age, more civil than using a swear word, something most people have been using since the age of…young? It seemed like a minor matter. You can call someone a moron in the Pit; why should we get on your case because you said he was on your ignore list? ---
**Author:** ![Tenebras](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/977dab/32.png) [@Tenebras](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tenebras)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2009, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-object-to-pit-rule-5/487276/12 "2009-03-05T17:08:14Z")
Unless they’re a mod or an admin, of course. You can only call them morons in ATM–wait a minute, I see what you did there! To address **scifisam2009** ’s point, if you are in a discussion in Great Debates, and you put poster **X** on your ignore list, you aren’t allowed to tell them so in GD. You can start a Pit Thread, though, and title it something like “Poster **X** is on my ignore list. That is all.” Can you provide a link to your new thread in the original GD thread, or does that count as ‘telling’? Can you periodically bump your pit thread until you’re sure **X** has gotten the message about why you’re not listening to them anymore? ---
**Author:** ![Omniscient](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omniscient/32/3290_2.png) [@Omniscient](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omniscient)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2009, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-object-to-pit-rule-5/487276/13 "2009-03-05T17:39:27Z")
This might be considered a hijack but I’ve always considered the ignore function to be anathema to the SD’s principles. This isn’t Facebook, MySpace or AIM. We’re here to talk, discuss and try and learn from one another. Fighting ignorance and all. If you are ignoring someone you aren’t learning anything and neither are they since you can’t correct them. Sure, people can be frustrating, but it’s part of the process. More practically, I think it damages the continuity of threads. If people are having a debate and you can only hear the words of 8 of the 10 people speaking you aren’t getting the full story. Debates and conversations are built on their context and if you don’t have any awareness of the full context then you can’t possibly understand or contribute effectively to the dialogue. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2009, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-object-to-pit-rule-5/487276/14 "2009-03-05T18:11:56Z")
If this was a sop to Cerberus, it was, as the level of continued growling and barking proves, a particularly ineffective one. As unnecessary as it was unwanted. ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2009, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-object-to-pit-rule-5/487276/15 "2009-03-05T20:46:08Z")
I think it’s a good idea to be informed you are on someone’s ignore list. I often wonder if I’m on an entire threads ignore list, or if my posts are so moronic they skip over them. Even a courtesy post would be nice, something like “Raft, you’re not on my ignore list, but, uhhmmm…can you STFU” ---
**Author:** ![Manduck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/manduck/32/256_2.png) [@Manduck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Manduck)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2009, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-object-to-pit-rule-5/487276/16 "2009-03-05T21:00:16Z")
I have everybody on my ignore list. As far as I am aware, I am the only person posting on this message board. ---
**Author:** ![Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/do_not_taunt/32/2968_2.png) [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Do_Not_Taunt)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 6:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-object-to-pit-rule-5/487276/17 "2009-03-06T06:56:04Z")
> [@Omniscient](#): > > This might be considered a hijack but I’ve always considered the ignore function to be anathema to the SD’s principles. This isn’t Facebook, MySpace or AIM. We’re here to talk, discuss and try and learn from one another. Fighting ignorance and all. If you are ignoring someone you aren’t learning anything and neither are they since you can’t correct them. Sure, people can be frustrating, but it’s part of the process. > > More practically, I think it damages the continuity of threads. If people are having a debate and you can only hear the words of 8 of the 10 people speaking you aren’t getting the full story. Debates and conversations are built on their context and if you don’t have any awareness of the full context then you can’t possibly understand or contribute effectively to the dialogue. I see your point, but (and I say this as someone with an empty ignore list) there are a few posters around who never, ever contribute anything of value, and furthermore, absolutely refuse to listen to anyone who attempts to fight their ignorance. I could see some posters getting fed up and adding such posters to their ignore list. I would, however, see posting about this to be in rather bad form, and am disappointed, though not surprised, by this particular rule change. I agree with whoever hypothesized that this was probably an attempt to throw a bone to posters upset with the other changes. “See - we took away your right to do x, but now you can do y. No net loss! Now, relax.” Stupid, but there you go. By the way, **RaftPeople** , you’re not on my ignore list, but.. (seriously, I’m the first to go here?)