Reply With QuoteThe problem, as you pointed out, is that ignoring only works if everyone ignores them.
Does anybody else even use it?
I had jkcerda on my ignore list for a long time, but it was not effective because about 80% of the non-jkcerda posts were responses to jkcerda. If I could have ignored Renz, I would have because he the responder in chief. But this board is set up not to allow users to ignore mods. Eventually, there was calls to ban him, and eventually, he was banned.
Now the same thing is happening all over again with nbohr1more. People can't resist responding to him even as they call for him to be banned.
Back in older times, I had dethtoll and SubJeff on my ignore list because they used to bicker incessantly all the time. I had no issue or quarrel with either of them individually, but it got personal between them and spilled into thread after thread. Recently, I had to do that again with June and SubJeff. If those two had kept their conflict out of the forum threads, I don't think things would have come to a ban.
So, I humbly suggest that instead of letting people get under your skin, and before the insults get thrown around, just put them on ignore. Instead of letting one poster suck all the air out of the forum, put them on ignore. Try not to waste your time and thread space expecting to change someone's mind or behavior.
Please?
The problem, as you pointed out, is that ignoring only works if everyone ignores them.
I've got nbohr, tony, and others on ignore and don't really pay attention to the responses to them. Works for me.
The real issue is lack of moderation. Two of the three mods for CommChat aren't even around anymore, and you can't put everything on Renz. There should be mods present who are more actively involved with the forums.
And I'm not talking about banning people, I'm actually pretty against perm bans except for extreme situations. But far more "taking a breaks" should be handed out when posters start to get unruly or disruptive (but not just for posting an unpopular view). And there should probably also be some type of "three strikes and you're out" rule so people know there are consequences to their actions. Right now it seems to be kind of a free for all, and the only time action is taken is when things get way out of hand.
I once was on a forum where posts from ignored members and (some) posts containing a quote from ignored members were made entirely invisible. They were even removed from the post count in the forum view, and wouldn't trigger an update of the "new posts" page.
That was pure bliss. I cannot use ignore features that show me a placeholder, it gives special importance to someone I'm hoping to ignore. And I'll always end up checking out what they wrote.
Originally Posted by Brethren
This is a very good point.
Would it be possible to get some more moderators in there? We'd need someone trustworthy who's willing to do the job, and buy-in from the admins.
I'd have to, like, read nbohr's posts if I were a mod, right?
I've said so when reporting one of nbohr's posts: once he proceeds from being batshit crazy to being batshit crazy and pointing an accusing finger at others here for being shills, IMO it's way past the time where people should be asked to have to ignore him.
There's a Greasemonkey script that hides the posts: https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/63...in-full-ignore
Unfortunately, it still shows other people quoting them.
I've been thinking the same forum-wide so I'll raise the issue in the staff forum.
Unfortunately, yes, you are obligated to read everybody's posts.
Just curious - have any mods recently messaged him to point out that he's worn out his welcome? Has anything been said or done? Just trying to catch up a bit.
I'm a bit late to this thread, but what about a "Hide Post" option, as well? If someone replies to X User on Y User's blocklist, then clicking a button or check box that keeps that individual post from appearing to Y User might help. It could also help with hiding individual posts that might be triggering or offensive to a user, but not necessarily worth blocking someone over.
I'm not sure about the complexity of the coding, but if it's doable and not too much of a hassle, maybe it could be considered?
I don't think moderation is really the answer with people like the bore. If people are tired of reading his conspiracy theories, just stop. We're adults and we should be able to control our urges. We shouldn't be looking for a moderator to ban somebody else because we can't stop reading their stuff.
ZenForo has a fairly complete ignore feature like Briareos H mentioned. It's nice. But even vBulletin's half-assed ignore helps remind me to have some self-discipline.
What would be the conditions to be a moderator and what tasks do they have? I´m fairly new to this forum and have almost zero knowledge to it, but I´d put the effort to learn about it if necessary. I´m pretty active here anyway since I came here and I´d like to help if needed since I really grew to love this forum
I don't think there are any particular conditions but moderators are invited by other moderators and approved or otherwise by Admin.
But if you do want to help, there's one thing I could certainly do with some help on in Thief General as I've not done anything on it for a year. If I may, I'll pm you but feel free to say nope if you want.
Sure, if I can help I´ll try my best
THIS.
Thank you
I don't think you should allow someone to spread lies and slander, and then say it's all right because other people can choose not to read them.
I agree with Nameless Voice, added to which: if we were to consistently take that approach, then just be honest about it and get rid of the moderators. (Not what I would want to happen, but if it all comes down to "You don't need to listen, regardless of what lies and slander people spout", even having moderators is pointless.)
And the last half-dozen years or so should have provided ample evidence that "You don't have to listen" is a dangerously careless tack to take.
If you want to make a place nicer, you get rid of the jerks.
I've been banging that drum for years now. It's been my single biggest gripe with TTLG's moderation style, even over the system they have where they punish the person with more infractions regardless of whether or not they were responsible for anything.
And I know what you're going to say. I've heard all the arguments:
- Wouldn't that include you,
mr. dethtollmx. gloom?
Damn right it would. This place was not good for my mental health. It's a toxic place that was making me a worse person. Getting yeeted from this place would honestly have done me wonders. Instead I had to wait until someone implied I should have killed myself as a teen to spare this place the pain of my presence to finally give up and walk away. I had to go through a period of personal growth that this place was actively stifling.
- You just don't want dissent!
There's plenty of room for dissent! But when the things people are dissenting over are are human rights it's time to step in. And there's always going to be people who just plain bring down the discussion even if they're not explicitly arguing that trans people are a plot by American corporations to destroy human individuality.
- You're always complaining that the Thief forums are a hugbox, aren't you a hypocrite?
If you really don't see the difference between a well-moderated community and a hugbox that aggressively rejects constructive criticism, then I dunno what to tell you, fam.
- It's just an internet forum! I log in, post, and leave!
So do other people. Don't you think they deserve a nice place to do it in? And if you don't really care, then your opinion about what to do with toxic users doesn't matter, does it?
And so on.
There's a difference between a quirky, insular culture and a toxic one, and to be perfectly honest with you, the difference is surprisingly slight in my experience. Mods actually doing something about this place's worst actors when they become a problem, and not after years of letting them get worse and worse, will go a long way.
And regarding the ignore function...
The ignore function is a band-aid. The only thing it ignores is the real problem.
Yeah, I think that ignore functions can help with personal antipathy, i.e. if a person keeps rubbing you the wrong way, but that's different from defining actual standards of behaviour for a place. There are a small handful of people here that I ignore, but I don't think they should be given a timed or permanent vacation from TTLG.
Besides ignoring the person, if what they claim can be easily refuted...then refute it! If I ran a science forum and some person came in claiming the earth was flat, I wouldn't ban them, I'd let everyone counter all their points and let reality speak for itself. Unless it became obvious that they were trolling.
Yeah, like that's been working...
Our trolls have been obvious for years. It's not like they don't get refuted.
Posting Permissions