So, if you’ve ignored me you won’t see this. :P. But what happens if someone quotes this?
Rest assured that any ignore of you by me would be a very temporary one for testing purposes only. I’m about to head out, but we can try it out on Sunday if you like.
Ahhh, so that’s what happens. I like it.
It might be a good idea to have the system warn you when you’re replying to someone you have ignored?
I’m not finding it. Is the beta UI not on the moble version?
If you click on the user’s icon, the ignore button is next to the message button beneath the name and icon.
It’s in mobile too. Just tap the person in question and it will appear on their profile.
My Dearest Meta,
What was once a rain forest of snark, memes, and hate has become a desert of intellectual conversations buoyed by meaningful comments and links.
I have begun to pack at once for my return home.
I found it in my profile > preferences > user.
It’s not coming up in your profile in Windows/Waterfox either. I will try Linux later.
Dunno, that’s on Android/Firefox. On MacOS/Firefox I get this:
Which doesn’t seem “hidden”…
But I did find the ignore list on MacOS/Firefox.
I think this is a great tool. I had someone a while back get into a disagreement and then pull the “don’t contact me again” card when, IMHO, they were just salty I disagreed with them.
The fact that months later they made a second aggressive reply to me, and had to be reminded that no contact requests are 2 way reinforced that belief.
While everyone deserves to feel safe on BB, I think the old way of doing things gave too much power to sealions to cut people out of the discussion.
otoh can’t this be used as a harassment tool?
(ex: people being toxic to certain BB correspondents because of their gender has been a problem)
Or people could register new accts just to pump ignore counts and build a case against someone?
also recall how people have mass downvoted stuff on netflix despite no intention to watch it just to harm female artists…
IMHO better to restrict that info to mods.
Given that dog piling on in forums is a thing, it’s not impossible that someone could try to game the system with a massively (not actually) passive aggressive block of “ignores”. I can certainly imagine some people who would do it, too, but it doesn’t seem like the most likely thing even if it is possible. ETA: But it does seem more likely someone would do this if the rankings were public. But such rankings might have more legit utility than abuse likelihood? I dunno.
Why would it?
PB had literal years and numerous chances to get his shit together and “be cool”… and yet he still never adjusted his problematic behavior even slightly, despite repeated conversations with the mods and several time-outs.
Easy answer: it’s NOT.
Like @smulder said nobody owes anyone else any time or attention.
This isn’t freakin’ kindergarten; everyone gets to decide for themselves if and how they choose to use the feature.
Grown-ass members will continue to make their own choices, like we have been all along… and the idea of people actively waging “campaigns” to ‘mass ignore’ certain members seems highly unlikely.
I’ve had the exact same thing happen to me, complete with unsolicited, profanity laced PMs sent to me. Could be the same person. The new ignore feature should be great as it will automate the whole “no contact” declaration thing and no PM will need or should be sent if someone wants to do that.
But, I do have a reservation. I do think people should be able to feel safe here, but the ignore feature completely removes the ignored posts rather than marking them hidden. I think that is both good and bad as it could also make it possible to bad mouth someone without the person being talked about being aware of it. Fortunately, the mod team is very proactive and I assume that personal attacks will be modded, even if the person being talked about doesn’t/can’t see them.
ETA: Doh. I was wrong about that. I didn’t see the hidden reply tags when I first checked out the functionality.
I think the community is wholesome enough we’d report those posts. I know I would
I think the bigger threat is someone who does not break the rules flagrantly, but argues in bad faith and sea lions, and when someone takes them to task with citations/logic they can not only stop that person, they can even stop you from correcting future errors.
If that person also posts semi-frequently, it’s a small community so you’re effectively shut out of discussions there participate in.
I think putting the onus on the user to ignore, rather than the poster to cater, is good.
We need to be vigilant people don’t use the board’s rules on assuming good faith etc. as a weapon and I think this change will be a great step in that direction.
This seems to me like an entirely sensible concern…
Luckily, we have good mods and a community that basically looks out for one another, most of the time.