I have been an occasional poster to various SD forums since a few years before payment was required. Sometimes, my posts have been received very negatively, with many vituperative responses.
Okay, we all pay our fees, and we each have every right to post and respond as we like. I want to hear it all. I am aware of the “Add so-and-so to Your Ignore List” option, but I am at a loss as to why anyone would ever choose to use it.
I regard forums such as these as the most open, um, forum for the exchange of ideas extant in the world to date. Why would anyone deliberately choose to exclude the entire input from any one individual on these boards? I mean, even if one disagrees with another’s views, or even finds them “offensive.”
What’s the threat? What’s the harm? Why would anyone choose to block the input of any one person, in a venue in which free input is the essence? Isn’t this how we learn?
Yes, I suspect that I have been placed by some members on their “ignore” list. These are probably people who have flamed me repeatedly, yet I haven’t chosen to “ignore“ their posts, nor those of anyone else, for that matter. I never intend to. Why would I?
I’m going to try to do this without stepping over the Fight Club rule.
I’ve only ever used it once, and it was temporary. I had been pissed off to the point that seeing anything by that poster immediately sent me over the edge. We inhabited a lot of the same threads, though; the subject matter pulled in both of us. It was better that I not even see that person’s posts. It allowed me some distance in order to calm down and gain some perspective. Eventually I reversed it.
If I’m in a social setting (especially one where I’m not networking), and there is someone making constant dumb comments and who is unpleasant to be around, I will tell them I have no wish to further converse, and will proceed to exclude myself from any conversation that person is in.
Same thing. Only here, when the unpleasant posters are in a thread, I exclude myself from anything they have to say while continuing the conversation. I’ll help fight ignorance, both yours and my own, but you have to meet me half way. Not enough hours in the day to make you my pet project - I have kids for that.
On the rare occasions that somebody’s comments were so stupid and wrong that it pissed me off to read them, I was successfully able to simply not read their posts anymore without technological help avoiding them.
Exactly as Maureen posted. My (and, I’m fairly sure, most others) ignore list is for people who are so trollish and thick-headed that every single set of words they string together raises my blood pressure to unhealthy levels.
Just checking, I note that of the 5 people I’ve ever put on there, all 5 have been subsequently banned, so I think I’m making good use of it.
That doesn’t work for me, as I don’t look at a poster’s name before reading the post. I read a post, and then look at the poster only if I have a reaction to the post. So, if there is a poster whose every post makes me want to reach through the monitor to dope slap them, I need something to stop me from reading the post. Monitors are expensive; these LCDs aren’t as sturdy as the CRTs were…
Okay, WE can each follow whatever rules we wish to. But if WE don’t talk about our club, how do WE keep it from turning into a stagnant pond of “ins“ and “outs“? I say, if you exclude another’s posts, you are denying yourself information, whether or not you agree with it. Any information could be useful.
drmark, I agree with you, and one of the things you’re seeing here is the effectiveness of the mods. If somebody were such a consistent jerk that their every post sent you over the edge, they’d be banned pretty quickly – much as Nanoda said. And it’s usually the case that people who are jerkish or unbearable about some things often have something worthwhile to say about something else. Unless you have a sense of tolerance about those people, you won’t have much fun here.
I quibble with you here, perhaps because I grew up in a time in which a “social setting” meant actual, face-to-face contact with other human beings. Various fauxes-pas could be met with immediate consequences, such as the type of shunning you mention. But the incomparable context in which we interact is without such constraints, unless we choose to impose them. Why would anyone ever choose to do so, in this context?
I have not asked to be yours, or anyone’s, “pet project.” As far as I’m concerned, neither you nor anyone need “meet me halfway” on any point. But I want to hear the viewpoints, all viewpoints. How I could I not want otherwise? How could anyone?
drmark2000, there are posters whom I’ve no wish to engage. This isn’t a one post or even a one thread decision. This is an ongoing, overall obtuseness (as opposed to the single subject obtuseness found in many politically themed threads). There are thousands of posters on the SDMB; me blocking out 5 or 7 of them is not going to prevent me from hearing ideas. As I don’t pay attention to who is posting until after reading the post, for me it’s better to make sure I don’t read the post.
As to “social” setting, I meant exactly as you did. I’m very blunt. The only fools I’ll suffer are fools whose foolishness matches my own (note, this does not mean I shun people simply for respectfully disagreeing - it goes beyond that.).
I think the implication there was that while it’s perfectly acceptable to use the ignore feature, announcing that someone is on your ignore list is forbidden. E.g. “Oh I don’t read posts by Bob because he’s on my ignore list” or “X you are now being ignored, so there!”
By the same argument, one could suggest that unless you read every thread, every post on the SDMB, you are also denying yourself information and intentionally excluding knowledge. Yet I suspect that few if any people actually manage this.
I suspect that most people will do just fine with judicious Ignore list usage and will find their reading experiences happier and more productive.
Exactly - the reference was a joking way of mentioning the official SDMB rule that you do not announce who is on your Ignore list, wave it around as a threat, etc. It wasn’t referring to a clique or anything.
I don’t actually have anyone on my ignore list right now, but I have considered it. There are a few posters who consistently spout blithering nonsense, (IMO, of course). By ignoring them, I would not be denying myself information, but rather improving the signal/noise ratio in a given thread to make it easier to get to the information that is there.
I believe the rules are as you have stated them. I don’t want to run afoul of this rule, therefore I don’t put anybody on my ignore list. Then I won’t be tempted to mention it.
There are several posters I don’t read, and I find that even if I don’t look at the name of the poster, I can recognize the SOS[sup]*[/sup] almost at once from reading the first line or so of their posts. I haven’t found that I have missed anything interesting from a discussion by not reading them. They genuinely have nothing to add.
There is a somewhat larger group that only respond in one or two ways. It is pretty easy to read the first half-paragraph or so, realize he is spouting off with a tu quoque this time instead of a misrepresentation, and skip the rest of the post. Again, nothing missed.