xash, do you find anything incongruous . . .

xash, do you find anything incongruous about your warning a poster in an ATMB thread for identifying but not naming a poster resulting in a further thread in ATMBin which the person who was not named is named several times?

I think the warning was for identifying a poster on one’s ignore list, which is against this rule.

The person isn’t on my ignore list. I tried it but I would still see where they were quoted which is why I posted and said the list doesn’t really work.

So you were warned for not identifying someone who is not on your Ignore list?

It would appear so :slight_smile:

Actually, the quoted rule by Dewey Finn was the violation. We all know what poster was being referred to. FloatyGimpy stated that this poster’s postings would still appear in a thread if he was quoted. A flaw in the ignore this poster function.

FloatyGimpy would only know this flaw if he had the poster on his ignore list and tried it out. Thus, the violation.

But she said the person is not on her Ignore list. A reasonable interpretation is that the person was not on her Ignore list when she posted the question.

Also, saying the poster is a pedophile is no ‘hint’ (hinting is mentioned in the rule) if someone doesn’t read pedophile threads. I think most people don’t read most threads.

The official warning is not justified and should be rescinded.

Or they’ve observed this phenomena with other posters on the ignore list?

Hear, hear! All xash has managed to do, despite his good intentions, is to further victimize a victim. Shameful.

The person may not be on the ignore list now, but that is irrelevant. The person **was **on her ignore list, and she admitted that by stating that the “Ignore this Poster” function wasn’t smart enough to delete this person’s posts if someone decided to use that person’s post in a quote for their own post.

It’s also irrelevant if not everyone knew who the pedophile was (and the traffic on those threads would indicate a lot of eyes read at least part of it). Many people knew exactly who the person in question is. The rule was broken.

It’s not a hard proof.

As to why you can mention who is on your ignore list in the Pit but no where else is the real issue here. You will get no argument from me on that.

But as it stands, she broke the rule.

To which an appropriate response, given the circumstances, would have been to pm her and discuss the matter, not to pounce with a warning.

Sorry I had to go to the store. Yes this person was on my ignore list at one point. I wasn’t trying to identify this person nor was I trying to not identify them. I was giving the reason why I found it so annoying that I still had to be subjected to their posts.

I agree with Muffin.

I just wanted to point out for anyone reading this and not the other thread that this issue seems to have been resolved:

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=540084

Yeah, xash rescinded.

But about the ignore list bug — it’s common knowledge. It isn’t like mentioning it would reveal anything at all about a person’s own ignore list. It is just a fact already known about all ignore lists.

The ignore list feature has always been problematic. When we first installed it, we got a lot of variations on “I’m putting you on my ignore list because I’m tired of reading the drivel that you think is deep.” There was a flurry of “You’re on my ignore list” posts that served no useful function at all. It was definitely the nyah, nyah. “Well, then, I’m putting YOU on MY ignore list in retaliation, so there.” The whole thing was ridiculous.

Consequently, we developed the rule of not mentioning who was on your ignore list. The rule, IIRC, applied everywhere, because we wanted to stop that game of taunting each other. We later realized that it was kinda dumb to be able to call someone “stupid assed summa bitch” in the Pit, but not be able to say, “And I’ve put you on my ignore list.” So we relaxed that rule (about not mentioning who is on the ignore list) for the Pit.

We’re still viewing the comment as an insult in the other forums.

It’s not a question of whether anyone KNOWS who’s on whose ignore list; it’s a question of personal insults. It’s just like, you CAN call someone a “stupid assed summa bitch” in the Pit, but you can’t elsewhere. That doesn’t mean people don’t know how you feel about that person; it only means that we don’t want personal insults outside the Pit forum.

So, just to be 100% sure, if I say plonk anywhere but the Pit, I’ve got a warning coming. Is that true?

Yes. It’s a guaranteed fight starter.

Amen. Thank you.