Incline Codex Ignore...

[Reapa]

I propose the removal of the ignore function on the codex. It seems unworthy and it feels like the codex does scale to peoples' levels.

 

[Kane]

wrong forum, should be in side feedback. ignoring reapa.

 

[Reapa]

side...

 

[Blaine]

SCO would probably disagree with you, had he not ignored you several months ago for posting something he didn't like one time.

 

[nomask7]

Thus speaks someone who is being ignored by a bunch of people. Seems like you're merely interested in the Codex scaling to your level after all.

 

[Reapa]

would be a valid point if it were true, but there's only 5 people ignoring me and i don't care much 4 any of them. it just doesn't seem very codexy to me to include such a mainstream feature.
It's also counterproductive to the potential level of fun around here.

 

[nomask7]

would be a valid point if it were true, but there's only 5 people ignoring me and i don't care much 4 any of them. it just doesn't seem very codexy to me to include such a mainstream feature.
It's also counterproductive to the potential level of fun around here.

Your idea of fun is driving the best members away because some deranged fuck ups are allowed to harass them freely?

If you want the ignore function gone, then you'd also have to police harassment.

 

[Whiny-Butthurt-Liberal]

I propose the removal of the ignore function on the codex. It seems unworthy and it feels like the codex does scale to peoples' levels.

Fully support.

Your idea of fun is driving the best members away because some deranged fuck ups are allowed to harass them freely?

Codex has no "best" posters. This is the toilet of the internet, and making some of the turds storm out in supreme butthurt would be top fun.

If you want the ignore function gone, then you'd also have to police harassment.

No, you just need to not be a little pussy bitch, or to amuse everyone with your suffering if you are one. Elecciónes y Consecuencias, puto.

 

[nomask7]

Codex has no "best" posters.

Obviously incorrect, and makes the rest of your message seem like try hard bullshit rhetoric regardless of if you actually mean it or not.

You can't start with such an obvious lie if you want someone to take your argument seriously.

 

[Bradylama]

Ignoring is a private form of board vigilantism. If management won't take care of the scum then good workin' folk have to take matters into their own hands.


Death Wish was a documentary about the time I took on a pack of dnfs.

 

[Admiral jimbob]

as an idiot piss man baby, "ignoring" is a useful concept that would not have occurred to me without a button that lets me do so, and prevents me from reading worthless things when i post giant turd threads on an internet forum, allowing me to read a carefully-filtered criterion collection of only the most constructive and enlightening views on the perils of miscegenation and agriculture. this is efficient and important to me. god is a faggot. god is hitler's faggot. there is no such thing as a faggot

 

[Whiny-Butthurt-Liberal]

Codex has no "best" posters.

Obviously incorrect

To be more precise, Codex has no good posters. Not under any definition of "good". Best is a comparative term, although few would be interested in choosing the best out of several sorts of shit.

 

[Blaine]

As much as I dislike the ignore function in principle, as the owner of a high-traffic forum, I recognize its necessity. When a member complains that another member is bothering them, it's much more efficient for staff to point to the ignore function and have done with it.

Many people are ruled by their emotions, and quite simply can't read things they don't like without getting mad. They may also lack the self-control to resist the temptation to respond to posts they find inflammatory. They may even feel compelled to click on threads they know that they aren't going to like, and/or read posts that they know are going to bother them, rather than simply disregarding or scrolling past past them as a grown-up would do. Finally, some people just hate confrontation and must avoid it in any way possible.

People who use the ignore function excessively to hide the posts of persons with whom they disagree are indeed butthurt and to be pitied; they're hiding themselves from things they don't like. They lack the intestinal fortitude to weather being challenged by people or opinions that are different. In the entire time I've been using the Internet (since 1993), I've only ignored persons who've first ignored me, in order to save confusion and ensure I don't end up responding to a brick wall.

Also, some people use the ignore function publically and deliberately as a way of conveying to the ignored individual that they don't like them, being sure to announce loudly that they're ignoring their target. This is juvenile and silly.

In short:

 

[Scruffy]

People who use the ignore function excessively to hide the posts of persons with whom they disagree are indeed butthurt and to be pitied; they're hiding themselves from things they don't like. They lack the intestinal fortitude to weather being challenged by people or opinions that are different.

why do people keep thinking this is the only case?
what if the person you've ignored is - for example - some moron who doesn't understand burden of proof and what evidence means, and so any discussion with him would be fruitless? (and his opinion meaningless)
what if the person you've ignored is a troll or a shitposter with nothing worth saying and who never contributed anything worth reading?
etc, etc, it's not like these forums have a scarcity of the two examples above, for instance.

 

[Commissar Draco]

If someone is pussy faggot enough to ignore my posts on internetz forum about RPG games, eaternal and trannies let piss be upon him;
idonthavetimeforthiscrap .

 

[Scruffy]

trannies let piss be upon him

that seems like the wrong thing to consider a curse, on these forums...

 

[Blaine]

what if the person you've ignored is - for example - some moron who doesn't understand burden of proof and what evidence means, and so any discussion with him would be fruitless?

What if he does good LPs? What if he's the first to review a new game? What if you'll come to find his posts genuinely humorous with time?

Slamming the door on people permanently because of some argument on the Internet is silly, and quite frankly, the vast majority of Codexers are really terrible at arguing. Are you going to ignore all of them? I tolerate the people with whom I vociferously disagree. I may not be able to "win" an argument through blameless argumentation, as though the forum were a convention of veteran philosophers arguing under the auspices of a brilliant moderator, but there are still interesting discussions to be had.

what if the person you've ignored is a troll or a shitposter with nothing worth saying and who never contributed anything worth reading?

The question is: Would you be ignoring them purely to save the .3 seconds required to scroll past their posts when encountered, or because of an emotional response on your part?

Also, I prefer to take the community as-is than to prune it to my taste. Prosper has absolutely nothing but senseless gibberish and poop-smear "art" to offer, and yet he's the forum mascot and his bizarre shenanigans amuse many. Many also ignore him, of course.

Finally, REALLY terrible members don't last long. If they spam/flood, are utterly obnoxious and constantly off-topic, or are just completely insufferable (hopefully bronies count among that number), the ignore function won't be necessary to sort them out. They'll leave or be made to leave.

 

[Scruffy]

What if he does good LPs? What if he's the first to review a new game?

oh, no, the people i've ignored are basically GD/POL only posters...

What if you'll come to find his posts genuinely humorous with time?

heh...

Slamming the door on people permanently because of some argument on the Internet is silly, and quite frankly, the vast majority of Codexers are really terrible at arguing. Are you going to ignore all of them? I tolerate the people with whom I vociferously disagree. I may not be able to "win" an argument through blameless argumentation, as though the forum were a convention of veteran philosophers arguing under the auspices of a brilliant moderator, but there are still interesting discussions to be had.

i don't care that much about arguing, but if in a discussion about rationality all one is able to spew is logical fallacies, and everything else he posts is worthless, i'd rather save myself the hassle to read the same logical fallacy for the 100th time...

The question is: Would you be ignoring them purely to save the .3 seconds required to scroll past their posts when encountered, or because of an emotional response on your part?

to save the time.
lol emotional response? if i were emotionally invested in intertnetz discussions i'd be a bit worried.

Also, I prefer to take the community as-is than to prune it to my taste. Prosper has absolutely nothing but senseless gibberish and poop-smear "art" to offer, and yet he's the forum mascot and his bizarre shenanigans amuse many. Many also ignore him, of course.

I don't see any particular reason to ignore him, not just because i almost never go to his forum, but because i find his rants - those one can sort of understand - interesting. Of course, if all he posted were the incomprehensible sort of rants, and if he weren't confined to his forum, i'd probably ignore him too, because his replies would simply be some meaningless babble that has got nothing to do with the discussion and only disrupt the flow of it. But prosper has actually made some... good? points in the shoutbox regarding certain stuff now and then, etc.

Finally, REALLY terrible members don't last long. If they spam/flood, are utterly obnoxious and constantly off-top, or are just completely insufferable (hopefully bronies count among that number), the ignore function won't be necessary to sort them out. They'll leave or be made to leave.

So why are people like dnf, jcd or dragofireheart still here? i'm afraid you're wrong on this one...



edit
to avoid discussing too much over this trivial matter and to avoid going in circles:
check out my ignore list. then let me know which of those posters has actually posted something of value, and i'll gladly remove them from my ignore list.

 

[zwanzig_zwoelf]

How about a better idea.
When you ignore someone, you are automatically added to the ignore list of ignored person, so both of you disappear from each other's lives and live happily in your retarded little world.

 

[Blaine]

So why are people like dnf, jcd or dragofireheart still here? i'm afraid you're wrong on this one...

Why is Roguey still here?

Edit: Just because you (or I) personally think that someone is beyond the pale, doesn't mean that they are objectively.

 

[Scruffy]

So why are people like dnf, jcd or dragofireheart still here? i'm afraid you're wrong on this one...

Why is Roguey still here?

because the codex loves drama and roguey is OK at trolling retards, causing butthurt. less retarded codexers enjoy the buttrage of those falling for the trolling.

 

[Blaine]

because the codex loves drama and roguey is OK at trolling retards, causing butthurt. less retarded codexers enjoy the buttrage of those falling for the trolling.

You just answered your own question. That's why I like Commissar Draco.

 

[Zewp]

The ignore feature is something worth chuckling about. People don't use it because they don't want to read certain people's posts, they use it because they want to spite them. If they simply didn't want to read certain member's posts, they would simply scroll past them.

 

[nomask7]

As much as I dislike the ignore function in principle, as the owner of a high-traffic forum, I recognize its necessity. When a member complains that another member is bothering them, it's much more efficient for staff to point to the ignore function and have done with it.

Many people are ruled by their emotions, and quite simply can't read things they don't like without getting mad. They may also lack the self-control to resist the temptation to respond to posts they find inflammatory. They may even feel compelled to click on threads they know that they aren't going to like, and/or read posts that they know are going to bother them, rather than simply disregarding or scrolling past past them as a grown-up would do. Finally, some people just hate confrontation and must avoid it in any way possible.

People who use the ignore function excessively to hide the posts of persons with whom they disagree are indeed butthurt and to be pitied; they're hiding themselves from things they don't like. They lack the intestinal fortitude to weather being challenged by people or opinions that are different. In the entire time I've been using the Internet (since 1993), I've only ignored persons who've first ignored me, in order to save confusion and ensure I don't end up responding to a brick wall.

Also, some people use the ignore function publically and deliberately as a way of conveying to the ignored individual that they don't like them, being sure to announce loudly that they're ignoring their target. This is juvenile and silly.

In short:

Are you also of the opinion that restraining orders exist only to pander to people who aren't "manly" enough to want to tolerate some psychopath ordering pizzas to their place at random hours or making prank calls in the middle of the night telling your wife they're the FBI and you're a suspected child molester?

I agree with almost all of what you say, but you're leaving that part open to interpretation. A person could be forgiven for assuming you believe all behaviour moderation by society is illegitimate unless we're dealing with violent or property crimes, and exists only to make feminists happy.

It seems like you might be trying to have your cake and eat it too. If you want to be consistent and make sense, then people are allowed to assassinate others due to perceived wrongs (insane), or you have to admit their behaviour must be moderated by society to a degree where they can be considered to be fit to live among the civilised.

 

[Scruffy]

because the codex loves drama and roguey is OK at trolling retards, causing butthurt. less retarded codexers enjoy the buttrage of those falling for the trolling.

You just answered your own question. That's why I like Commissar Draco.

but i don't ignore any of those two
so here's my question: why is, let's say, dnf still here? what has he contributed? according to your theory, he should have been "made leave". there's literally zero threads/replies of his that are worth shit. Hell, even I contributed more to these forums, and i didn't contribute dick.

or, more to the point: can we agree that putting someone in ignore isn't necessarily done out of any "lacking the intestinal fortitude to weather being challenged by people or opinions that are different", but can also be done because some elements are simply useless and there's no point having them in sight? can we agree that a retard who doesn't understand burden of proof or evidence cannot have any valid "opinion that is different", and if this element only posts in GD/POL, someone could want to avoid reading the same fallacies over and over?