Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Stopping users on your ignore list posting on your threads

Should ignored users be prevented from posting on your threads?

  • Yes, great idea, stop them

    Votes: 34 29.8%
  • No, poor idea, they should still be able to contribute

    Votes: 80 70.2%

  • Total voters
    114
  • Poll closed .


Bozza

You can change this
Helpful Moderator
Jul 4, 2003
55,575
Back in Sussex
I've found a modification that will prevent users that you have on your ignore list from posting on threads that you start. They'll simply not be able to contribute where you started a thread.

Shall I install it?
 












Goldstone Rapper

Rediffusion PlayerofYear
Jan 19, 2009
14,865
BN3 7DE
It's a bad idea.

When you start a thread, you're merely starting it, not owning it. It's not 'your' thread, as such, but belongs to anyone and everyone who may wish to read or add to it.

I don't see what good it would do to bar people from a right of reply. It might lead to threats of 'If you disagree with me again I'll threaten to ignore you and therefore stop you posting again'. It doesn't make for a healthy forum.
 


sparkie

Well-known member
Jul 17, 2003
12,466
Hove
Ooo. So we can ignore all the palace posters and then start a thread making fun of the jestermen.

Sounds reasonable.
 






hans kraay fan club

The voice of reason.
Helpful Moderator
Mar 16, 2005
61,094
Chandlers Ford
It's a bad idea.

When you start a thread, you're merely starting it, not owning it. It's not 'your' thread, as such, but belongs to anyone and everyone who may wish to read or add to it.

I don't see what good it would do to bar people from a right of reply. It might lead to threats of 'If you disagree with me again I'll threaten to ignore you and therefore stop you posting again'. It doesn't make for a healthy forum.

All of this. There's no such thing as 'your threads'.
 




Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patreon
Nov 15, 2008
31,765
Brighton
I wouldn't be a fan. The people on my ignore lists are the people I don't want to read. But they get responses elsewhere, so some people must like what they have to say, so even if I'm not interested on what they have to say on a topic I bring up, I would imagine others might.
 






Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patreon
Nov 15, 2008
31,765
Brighton
Also, what about the people who are on the ignore list of those who start official match threads, or ratings threads, or big news stories. We get enough repeat threads as it is, do we want to install a system that will force people to have to start new threads to comment on a topic that already has a thread?
 


It's a bad idea.

When you start a thread, you're merely starting it, not owning it. It's not 'your' thread, as such, but belongs to anyone and everyone who may wish to read or add to it.

I don't see what good it would do to bar people from a right of reply. It might lead to threats of 'If you disagree with me again I'll threaten to ignore you and therefore stop you posting again'. It doesn't make for a healthy forum.
I agree.
 










hitony

Administrator
Jul 13, 2005
16,284
South Wales (im not welsh !!)
The vast majority of people put someone on ignore for no other reason than their contributions on a thread are nothing more than “trolling” reasons, the main amount of reported posts we get are people reporting “trolls” so if you start a thread and you know that the trolls you have on ignore can’t contribute within that public thread it will create the thread/s to flow with far more reasoned healthy debate and will prevent the trolls from derailing the thread and turning it into a binfest.

I also believe that it will increase the use of the vastly underused “ignore” function, it has absolutely nothing to do with the thread starter “owning” the thread, just about everyone starts a thread for it to cause open healthy debate and for sensible contribution, as indeed this very thread is doing!

If anyone does have individuals on ignore purely because they don’t agree or like their opinions (trolls aside) they are the ones who have a problem, they clearly don’t want to listen to other peoples opinions or reasons, I doubt many people like that actually start threads anyway.

This function should be given a trial run in my opinion, use it for say a 3 month period and we can then monitor it and see if it is an asset to the board or not.
 




dougdeep

New member
May 9, 2004
37,732
SUNNY SEAFORD
The vast majority of people put someone on ignore for no other reason than their contributions on a thread are nothing more than “trolling” reasons, the main amount of reported posts we get are people reporting “trolls” so if you start a thread and you know that the trolls you have on ignore can’t contribute within that public thread it will create the thread/s to flow with far more reasoned healthy debate and will prevent the trolls from derailing the thread and turning it into a binfest.

I also believe that it will increase the use of the vastly underused “ignore” function, it has absolutely nothing to do with the thread starter “owning” the thread, just about everyone starts a thread for it to cause open healthy debate and for sensible contribution, as indeed this very thread is doing!

If anyone does have individuals on ignore purely because they don’t agree or like their opinions (trolls aside) they are the ones who have a problem, they clearly don’t want to listen to other peoples opinions or reasons, I doubt many people like that actually start threads anyway.

This function should be given a trial run in my opinion, use it for say a 3 month period and we can then monitor it and see if it is an asset to the board or not.

What an eloquent, well thought out post. I now agree with this learned gentleman.
 





Paying the bills

Latest Discussions

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here