Disable the ignore function

What, no, I was referring to what you just said. It's irrelevant to the conversation anyways.

 

Jello, ignoring is normally a negative form of social interaction (exclusion and disempowerment), but I guess when you say that this place is a "community" where people come to "interact with each other" that has to be qualified by the fact that this particular community is an "online" community, with all of the inherent limitations on the ability of the 'community' to properly regulate social interaction, compared to a physical community of people where the social interaction has more immediate consequences. In other words, in an online community sometimes 'ignoring' is a positive form of social interaction and should be encouraged moreso than in a physical community where there are other forces of social control.

 

Isn't there over 250,000 members at TFN? How can me ignoring one of two people inhibit interaction within a community? We have over 250,000 members...and I guarantee some of those people are irritating and deserve to be ignored. This seems like overkill. A handful of people are being butts when it comes to the ignore button and are disjointing a few thread. Why can't the mods get rid of these people? If you know they are causing problems remove them. If you can't remove them then that is reason enough to keep the ignore button. If you can't moderate these trouble makers allow us to ignore them.

 

No. Excluding socks (duplicate accounts) and inactive accounts, there was never anywhere near that many. I'm not really taking the "community" angle, but lets take a look at the users online at the moment.

Online now: 391 (members: 120, guests: 271

Not quite 250,000. And "guests" can't post.

 

Not to mention that the majority of those "guests" are most likely bots...

 

Ender Sai you bring up a great point. I just skimmed through the Rules of the JC lists, and whatever the decision made regarding the ignore function the Terms of Service are a tad dated, and maybe (if kept) the function should be added to the Rules of the JC list in one of its' categories, or its' own. When I first started on these forums I was not familiar with a lot of the features, and a brief description of like, ignore, follow, etc. though they may seem self explanatory could be rather helpful.

As for your comment, "the boards were set up with a specific decision in mind, and I'm not sure the ignore feature is compatible with that", a question to that would be with the original boards the Terms of Service specified having been setup anew, do some of those ambitions to which the earlier blueprint adhered still remain as the fundamentals that this current board operates under?

In my opinion, I think these boards only share a similar genetic makeup with the previous ones, but with these having been fostered to employ the strengths and to take heed from the weaknesses of their predecessors, whilst being posited to higher standards befitting of a more modern approach.

Ignore seems like it was intended as one such improvement, but I, of course, admittedly have not a clue if that was why it was implemented by those behind these forums or not...

 

It's just a default setting. It wasn't actually implemented.

 

Oh, all right. Thanks for clarifying.

 

And honestly, it would be easier to remove the feature than amend the Terms of Service.

 

And, AFAIK, many default settings have been turned off/changed. You can't edit a PM, you can't delete a post, you can't put images in your signature, there are edit time limits, etc. Those are for practical "this is not your personal social network" reasons, same reason I want the ignore feature gone. Eh.

 

You, sir, have made large amounts of sense here. Basically more sense in this one thread than Wocky has made since 2007.

 

I agree completely but my comment was a response to this comment from you in your earlier post: "Bottom line is that I see this place as a community where people interact with each other. That's how this place functions and thrives, and something like the ignore feature inhibits that (to me)."

I was trying to distinguish between the different types of "communities" (online and physical) and suggest that an ignore function does not necessarily inhibit interaction in an online community. Trying being the operate word here.

 

You guys seem to think that there are users who, if given access to the ignore function, will have a negative impact on threads, but if denied the ability to use ignore, will contribute positively. Questionable! Some have advanced the point that "good ignorers" might just as well discipline themselves to avert their eyes from the posts of users they don't want to read. But we're also saying that at the same time, "bad ignorers" will involuntarily improve their behavior if forced to use this method?

Well If it's true that forcing rude posters to mentally skip the posts they don't like will result in some information "seeping through" and prompting better behavior from them, wouldn't forcing me to mentally skip the posts I don't like also result in some information "seeping through" and annoying me, or tempting me to snap back? But if it's no big deal for me to mentally skip posts, then why will the boards get better if a few "ignore abusers" are forced to do it?

We're venturing into very disreputable territory if we start with, "Oh, only the bad guys will even mind. Good people wouldn't be affected."

 

Well, no, we're not because, you know, over a decade without ignore?

 

Yes! Ban the abusers. Give them a warning and if they continue to derail a thread start temp banning them. Just add "Don't abuse the ignore button..." in the rules of the forum. Explain what abuse would look like and what the mods will do if they abuse the function.

 

The problem with the thought of banning the abusers is we have no way of knowing if the person is doing that or if they are just scrolling past people or even just being nonsensical. We can't see who ignores whom.

(This isn't saying I feel one way or the other, I've been following closely and have actually been swayed both directions with different opinions. I honestly don't know how I feel about it right at this moment. )

 

It's not a forum policy, though... the ignore feature is just a default setting... much like, as Evan pointed out, the ability to edit PMs, delete posts, put images in your sig, etc.

Anyway... we're repeating ourselves, now. We don't need to make the same arguments, back and forth, for the entirety of this thread. I've given my thoughts, and they're recorded here for MS to review... same with other peoples' thoughts. I'm going to follow Jello's lead and back off a bit, to give others the opportunity to post their thoughts. I'll post again if I come up with something else, or think of something new, but I'm getting tired of defending the same argument, over and over.

 

don't have a problem with the "ignore" feature (nor do I have anyone on it)

I like knowing the option is there however. As someone who (admittedly) can be easily annoyed (a fault of my own and not a virtue) I'd rather be able to cool off by simply saying "right, putting you on ignore for awhile while I cool off" than being dragged into a bait and banned.

my two cents anyway.

 

We pick and choose which discussions we participate in and nobody should be compelled to engage with anyone they don't want to.

The ignore feature supports the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Principles of Behaviour (being on ones best behaviour, being respectful to oneself, taking responsibility for ones own behaviour). I can't find a rule or principle that it contradicts or inhibits.

 

I'll add my tuppence worth.

Yes we had a long time with the 'ignore' function. But during that time we also had a lot of people asking if it was possible to have one. It wasn't, but it shows that back then there was an interest in having one. I don't see the "we went along without one" argument to be a valid one, as it was oft-requested.

As for it's usage now, I've used it. I found one user particularly grating and it detracted from my enjoyment of the boards. So I put him/her on ignore for a bit and carried on in blissful ignorance of what that person said. At a later date, I then removed that "ignore" happy that if I felt I couldn't enjoy all the boards because of one user then I could do the same again.

The misogyny thread aside, I have yet to see any unproductive use of the ignore function, and thus no need to remove it. From what I see, the benefits outweigh the negatives.

Yes, that one thread was a problem, but as one person here as said we should act on the user/post level. There's no need to change board policy due to one errant thread.