How to place other forum members on "ignore"

[Greg Pack]

I visit lots of forums out there in computer land. Many forums use the same software as this one. Occasionally, what are known as "trolls" come along. They post with the seeming intent of stirring up a hornet's nest. Each forum usually has "troll" guidelines. Some trolls are outright banned by moderators. But some think that allowing trolls to post is good for a forum, and free speech in general.

If you find trolls bothersome and a general waste of your time, you can use this forum software to place this poster on your "ignore list" To do this just follow this simple procedure:

Find a post made by the troll. Click on his name at the top of his/her post. Let's see , it's easier to describe if I use a member's name for an example. For this example I will use Patrick H. Crowe. After you click on Pat's name it will take you to his profile. Just below his name in a blue bar there are two options. One is "add Patrick H Crowe" to your buddy list The other is "add Patrick H Crowe to your ignore list" If you click on the latter, it will ask you to save your changes to your ignore list.

And "poof" just like that, you can place any member who continually posts inflammatory messages into never land.

If you find your self esteem dropping and begin to have masochistic tendencies again, you may remove the troll from your ignore list at any time and once again dramatically raise the signal to noise ratio of your favorite forum.

I hope you find this helpful.

 

[Joe Law]

Good one!!

 

[PaulLovesJamie]

cfcw: if ever I meet you in person, I'd like to buy you a beverage of your choice. Well stated sir!
Bill: I WANT THAT FEATURE!!!

See, I am in fact one of those people who believes in free speech, so I dont want to see anybody banned. (really.) But I suspect I've been missing out on some good threads, because I completely ignore all threads that were either started or derailed by certain people. (OK, 1 person.) An anti-A.H. setting that simply zapped all of his crap from my view would certainly make my favorite forum even better.

Edit: Curiosity got the better of me - I did go look at the recent post just to see what prompted your comments. What a load. Glad to see I havent been missing anything.

 

[MEP001]

Bill: I WANT THAT FEATURE!!!

The feature is already there. You can also click your User Options link at the top left, select Buddy/Ignore Lists from the bottom left and type in a name, which will even auto-complete itself based on the Members List.

 

[pitzerwm]

I try to cover all bases

 

[PaulLovesJamie]

Ahhh, nice.
I'm aware of the buddy list, but clicking on the persons name only shows "add to buddy list," it doesnt show "ignore". OK, I admit it, I use "new posts" and thats about it.

Well, I used to only use new posts, before today...

Thank you gentlemen.

 

[mac]

What I want to know is if cfcw really is a cage fighter. Discretion is really the better part of valor. Thanks for the tip.

 

[Greg Pack]

What I want to know is if cfcw really is a cage fighter.

Let's just say that I'm traniing in many of the fighting arts.........

 

[Skipper Jack]

The 'ignore' feature can be a dangerous tool for a forum.

A critical mass of users is vital for any forum to thrive. In my humble opinion, this forum is getting more cliquish and unwelcoming, particularly towards those that don't fit the conservative paradigm of this forum.

If the goal is to drive away people that don't fit a narrow dogma, it can be easily accomplished. Driving contributors away from this forum may be satisfying to those that only want to hear their own voices, but it is not a sound business plan for a forum operator.

 

[MEP001]

A critical mass of users is vital for any forum to thrive. In my humble opinion, this forum is getting more cliquish and unwelcoming, particularly towards those that don't fit the conservative paradigm of this forum.

The "Ignore" feature isn't a censorship, and using it doesn't let anyone know any more than if you manually skipped over their posts.

 

[mac]

Hello Skipper. I think that you have stumbled on a fact that is not mentioned much, that many if not most of the people who come here are conservative. I think, and it's just my opinion, that is due to the fact that most are are small business operators. To me being conservative means the less government the better, and at all levels. Most every operator here has had to put up with some government regulation that makes no sense. It can start at the local level where a city councilman will let a code variance get approved for a buddy when your request was denied. It can be minimum wages, family leave, worker's comp insurance, handicap parking and restroom. The list literally never ends. When you are faced with these in every aspect of starting and running a small business, it gives you a certain outlook that generally is not favotable to government. Just my analysis. You will also see the most strident opinions on this section of the forum. Most respect the other parts.

 

[JJJakubowski]

(This post deleted cuz it was an inadvertent/tech glitch repetition of the following post ...)

 

[JJJakubowski]

IMO, Harry Truman's story is relevant to the recent tack of this thread ... even tho' it's probably a better fit with some others in this section of the Forum. Regardless, I'm here now, sooooo ....

Harry never took an IQ test ... he did not even go to college. Instead, he worked a small family farm. And then he owned a humble haberdashery ? selling mostly men's hats.

After Harry's small business went bust, a well connected friend got him to run for the US Senate. He won ... and then was catapulted into the Vice Presidency under Roosevelt. After FDR's death, (just a couple months into his 4th term), Harry was at the Presidential helm when we won WWII and saved the world.

Harry got the USA into the Korean War, which was so unpopular, Harry had the lowest popularity rating ... ever ... until George W's unpopular war.

Harry was "just a regular guy" --- someone who was fairly smart but blessed with an uncommon amount of common sense, guts, determination, an unwavering sense of right and wrong, and a believer in and defender of traditional American values.

It took a several decades of time and perspective, but Harry Truman came to be regarded by US historians as being among America's top 10 Presidents.

Is it just me, or does that bit o' history resonate well with circumstances today?

And to lurch tangentially back to Skipper and Mac's last exchange --- it's a tragic irony that heroic Conservative Democrats in the mold of Harry Truman, Hubert Humphrey or John F. Kennedy would be now be reviled as pariahs in that Party. Many (if not most) of us Conservatives did not leave the Democrat Party ... it Left us.

JJJ/SSCWN
--------------------------
The poster formerly known

 

[Greg Pack]

Skipper, I hope you have felt at least somewhat welcome. I know a lot of forums acknowledge and welcome newbies better than this one. But honestly, If someone's primary reason to come to a trade related forum appears to be to post political related messages that they know will provoke strong responses, they're a troll in my book. Read them and enjoy if you like, Personally, I am conservative and disenchanted with both main political parties and will likely vote elsewhere.

 

[PaulLovesJamie]

I am not a conservative. In fact, I suspect many of you are not either. Since we're in the politics-acceptable just-about-anything forum, I'll go out on a limb and suggest a survey: what is your political philosophy." Bill ... ???? I'm actually curious to know.

Since we all seem to disagree on what "conservative" and "liberal" mean, to keep it objective please base it on the result from taking the "worlds smallest political quiz" which is 10 simple questions and takes all of 30 seconds. Results/choices should be: Left Liberal; Right Conservative; Libertarian; Statist; Centrist.

 

[pitzerwm]

Just ask: http://forum.autocareforum.net/showthread.php?t=2181

 

[JJJakubowski]

Far be it from me to define your political identity, Paul, but I do not ever recall hearing a Libertarian say he was not Conservative. As I have always understood, Libertarians are uncompromising, principled, "arch" Conservatives ? toward the "Far Right" and the direction toward which I'm grateful you're tugging the electorate and their representatives.

So correct me where I'm wrong, but isn't saying a Libertarian is not Conservative much like a Socialist saying he's not a part of the broader Liberal Left?

Thanks ... and geez I sure wish we had found the time to get into this stuff down in Orlando.

JJJ/SSCWN
---------------------------------
The poster formerly known

 

[PaulLovesJamie]

I do not ever recall hearing a Libertarian say he was not Conservative.

Ahh, JJJ, you're hearing it now!
Yes, I do share some points of view with conservatives, but that doesnt mean I am a conservative. I also share some points of view with women ...

I think you've fallen into the well placed and well oiled trap of listening to the mass media, they've been spectacularly successful at convincing Americans that the political spectrum is linear - its a straight line from liberals on the left to conservatives on the right, and where you sit is simply a matter of degree, but everyone is either an R or a D, with independents being "undecided fence sitters." That works nicely to help ensure that those 2 parties retain power.

I dont believe it is linear, I find it to be 3 dimensional. Thats one of the reasons I find the "worlds shortest political quiz" to be particularly valuable - not only is it a very quick & accurate assessment, it also points out that libertarian & statist are not simply "degrees of R/D".

 

[pitzerwm]

Paul, I added it to the poll, but I have no clue what a Statist is, could you enlighten us, please. Since I let Doug and Pat ramble on, feel free to enlighten us on Libertarian too.

 

[JJJakubowski]

I believe that maybe, just maybe, Paul has fallen into the misconceived stereotype that Conservatives are necessarily rigidly judgmental Christian Right types who want to impose their strict moral/cultural code on others. While that profile certainly fits some under the Conservative tent, it sure does not define Conservatism.

Basically, Conservatives believe in small government, low taxes, and individual freedoms but with personal responsibility. We desire to "conserve" the concepts of freedom, rights, responsibility and "traditional values" as they were made manifest by our Founding Fathers in the Declaration of Independence and, of course, the Constitution. Libertarians are totally in sync with all that.

Okay, I acknowledge that many Libertarians do consider themselves a breed apart — "neither Liberal or Conservative" because they say they are a MIX of the two. Namely, Conservative on economic issues, and Liberal on social issues.

Libertarians most often take heat for their belief that such "personal choices" as prostitution, gambling, use of heroin, cocaine, meth, etcetera should all be legal. BUT they also believe that anyone who makes such choices is personally and solely responsible for living and dealing with the consequences — something that perfectly dovetails with Conservatism, while being totally at odds with Liberalism.

Oh yeah, Libertarians share points of view with Conservatives --- BIG time! And we guys share points of view with women. But beyond that, we share something even more essential with "our better halves" : the X chromasome. And to stretch that analogy — in the DNA of a Libertarian you'll most definitely find the "C (Conservative) Chromosome". And if a Liberal gene is somewhere in there too — it's recessive ... thank God.

JJJ/SSCWN
-------------------------
The poster formerly known