NT Meta: Ignore Me!
I have been thinking about this for a while. Many of us came from another venue where we had an option to "ignore" a fellow member. That isn't possible on the Ning system. And although for the most part, members do get along, there have been times, where I felt that if we had the feature, members might use it and it might have stopped some of theargumentsthat turned really nasty..
So here is what I propose. That we have a listing of ignores. This will be done by posting to an article called "Ignore Me". Each post will have the name of the person making the request and to whom the request is made. Once this has been posted, the parties who have been asked to be ignored must not reference, directly or indirectly theindividual they have asked to be ignored, and the person who the request was made up shall also not make reference to directly or indirectly to the person who requested the ignore.
I am putting this to the group for discussion. As per usual, I am open for suggestions/concerns and a vote will be taken at the end.
Let it rip!
Tags
Who is online
57 visitors
Randy,
A little fast on the trigger. This isn't a group decision yet. But noted.
I've never used ignore on the vine . But I am an indie so I guess that is to be expected . I'm going to have to think about this some more . How does one go about rescinding the ignore if one has a change of heart/mind ?
OK, what if some of the terms of the ignore is that certain terms be established both ways?
Also, how is this different than the what was on the vine?
They canrescindit, so long as the other person who the ignore was on agrees.
Good Man Mike. I totally dig ya.
Crap... a trifactor! The earth must be coming to an end.
OMG... I leave for a little while and 30 comments!
I'm scared!
I don't think of the "ignore" function as being effective anyway. What it did was prevent users from seeing comments attached to the one ignored, although you indicated you cannot provide that same function here. It was always tempting to open an ignored comment, especially if it immediately followed your own, because the chances were that it addressed your comment.
I would have hoped that members signed up for NT because they wanted a friendly site for discussions, and in many cases to escape from the vicious and biased commenters they may have experienced elsewhere. I don't really think that some technological method to ignore another should be necessary, or even the method that you suggested, which to me seems cumbersome. We have witnessed a slapfight on an article which, unfortunately, I had posted, but it was brought under control. Besides, even here on commenting on a topic where there was a difference of opinion between myself and another, and I did become upset over it, I have foundboth benefit and enjoyment in discussing other topics with that same member. Had "ignore" been put into effect, I would not have had that opportunity. I think the answer is self-control, and if a member is unable to exercise that maturity, and needs to resort to personal attacks, then they should be removed from the site.
Good point. But how is ignore here different than what was on NV? Just playing
Beelzebub advocate?
Seems like a waste of time. Even with an actual ignore button, people cant from peeking. Plus, it is functionally incorrect to begin with, since the person you are ignoring can continue to slam you regardless.
Simply putting up a list of people you dont want to talk to is about as effective as drawing in sand on a windy day. It assumes that all parties share a mutual respect, enough so at least to honor the request. That hardly seems like anything people are going to adhere to if they see comments they dont like or disagree with.
Therefore, i vote no, and would probably never look at the list anyway. Certainly, i would never bother putting anybody on the list, since i can just as easily put them in their place and enjoy myself doing it. Even if i am asked to censor my comments from time to time, lol.
Well, the first would kind of suck.
Look, just throwing spit balls here.
Also, let's try not to make this personal. The point was to remove the "personal" around here.
Not a bad idea, sort of like entering into a contract to not address or mention each other, and if they do they are banned. If they refuse to enter into such a conract when the tone of their comments indicate that they should, that itself should be reason to ban them.
Gee guys don't hold back.
tsk, tsk Bruce. You shoudn't go around speaking (or writing as the case may be) to people like that if you arent capable of taking the same in response. You cried because you thought i was calling you a jackass. It seems to me that what is good for you doesnt carry over to anybody else (i.e. you like to control the conversation, and dont know how to debate a topic). Personally, i prefer Randy.
Buzz,
That was a most convincing argument. You are still on the Queens Bench.
Peter/D'wayne,
So noted.
Me neither. And it was the reason that this site was started. Just some recent event got me thinking. But this is not adictatorship, and the community sets the standard, and that won't change. No matter what, it has to be the groups decision.
Hey you guys post too fast. Damn
I look good! I look good!
Let's all try to keep the anger factor down. I didn't do this article as a meta fight. I did it to try and stop one. It's just an idea. Lordy.
Feronia,
*snort*
; )
So I'm guessing that you didn't use ignore on NV
Feronia... don't! Your making me laugh and I have to be serious... I think?
Harry not represented. Apparently he has already run off crying.
A bitter clinger is somebody who enjoys lemons straight from the tree.
-Peter Faden Dictionary for Modern English
Yeah... how the two of you became best buds on the vine, still eludes me, LOL!
Did I post elsewhere here that I agreed with your concept that was used on another site for persons who cannot control thair conflict - to be made to enter a form of "contract" to ignore and not even mention the name of the other or address any of their comments? If they refuse to sign up to that, then they do not deserve to be among respectful people and should be banned, and banned as wellfor breaking their contract. When they learn to behave andmutually agree to be freed from the restriction, then it could be terminated but going back toattackingwouldthen alsoearn a ban. It would require self-control on both parts but then we are mature adults, are we not?
I know that you Americans are crazily in love with your First Amendment, but even that has limitations, and this is a private site so it need not be applicable.
Nice post Feronia and Mike... no one takes your beliefs personally....
Double *snort*
Point taken Feronia.
Gee Mike, I'm shocked. LOL!
I agree, except you are wrong and I am right, all of the time (even when we agree). Fortunately, all i really care about is beer, Tool, and Will Ferrell....oh, and chillin' nude in very confined areas.
''Or, we could follow the charter, and just address ideas, without digressing into personal conflict.''
So far the best idea I've read.
I addition, and since no one has come out and said it yet, maybe we should add this to the front page. "Before you sign up, make sure you are capable of growing a pair when needed. Otherwise, the internet is a big place and the front door is in the top left corner of your screen."
Shelly,
Spot on!