Skip to main content

New forum features - introducing 2 way ignore.

New forum features - introducing 2 way ignore.

JK said:
Due to the feedback on this thread I have disabled 2 way ignore.

I apologise to those who where using the function and where pleased with this option.

As @Jack Daniels suggests this does therefore mean that the moderation team will have to start implementing bans if anyone starts taking advantage of this.

We reserve the right to switch it back on should feedback determine more users would prefer us to do so.

Whilst always welcoming feedback from our patrons I have found some of the criticism slightly OTT. As always everything we do is to try and improve the user experience whilst also ensuring our moderators don't have too much to do.
Click to expand...
The feedback on this thread has been completely one sided though. Mainly complaints from users who have clearly been ignored by other users for whatever reason and don't like it. I personaly like the system. You seem to have acted in support of a "noisy minority" Not very democratic. Why not have a vote? No argument with the outcome there.
 
Henrys Cat said:
The feedback on this thread has been completely one sided though. Mainly complaints from users who have clearly been ignored by other users for whatever reason and don't like it. I personaly like the system. You seem to have acted in support of a "noisy minority" Not very democratic. Why not have a vote? No argument with the outcome there.
Click to expand...
"Being Ignored and they don't like it" was not the problem - and the Ignore function still works.

And I don't mind being Ignored at all, by whoever wants to Ignore me. I use the feature myself (though I used it a lot less when 2-way Ignore was active, and took almost everyone off my old Ignore list).

The problem with 2-way Ignore was it made large areas of the forum unreadable if posters who had you on 2-way Ignore also posted a lot. The feature caused a lot of collateral damage, completely outside the Ignored user's control, and it was this aspect we didn't like.

Hiding Ignored posters' posts under a "spoiler alert"-type tag is way better IMO - it means you don't need to read what Ignored people are saying (the whole point of Ignore), but you can if you want to, so the flow of discussion is not broken for you.

And for the Ignored people themselves, the flow of discussion is not broken either, which makes the forum much more usable for everyone - which is surely the main thing?
 
Henrys Cat said:
The feedback on this thread has been completely one sided though. Mainly complaints from users who have clearly been ignored by other users for whatever reason and don't like it. I personaly like the system. You seem to have acted in support of a "noisy minority" Not very democratic. Why not have a vote? No argument with the outcome there.
Click to expand...

I fully agree HC and I think it's a very good function, I wouldn't have paid money for it if I thought otherwise.

I fully intended to wait until the licence was due to expire and have a vote on it. I do try and be as democratic as I can.

However, myself and the moderation team have been grinded down I guess.

All I can suggest at present is that if people have issues with indervidual posters spoiling their enjoyment of the forum by breaking the rules, or sprit of those rules they report them. We will then address that situation on an idervidual basis.

As I stated I can easily turn it back on again.
 
JK said:
I fully agree HC and I think it's a very good function, I wouldn't have paid money for it if I thought otherwise.

I fully intended to wait until the licence was due to expire and have a vote on it. I do try and be as democratic as I can.

However, myself and the moderation team have been grinded down I guess.

All I can suggest at present is that if people have issues with indervidual posters spoiling their enjoyment of the forum by breaking the rules, or sprit of those rules they report them. We will then address that situation on an idervidual basis.

As I stated I can easily turn it back on again.
Click to expand...
If I may say so I think you're taking our comments the wrong way, I don't think the reaction is anything like you seem to portray it; the function impacts the quality and usability of the forum that's it nothing more than that.
 
California_PNE said:
If I may say so I think you're taking our comments the wrong way, I don't think the reaction is anything like you seem to portray it; the function impacts the quality and usability of the forum that's it nothing more than that.
Click to expand...

I am not trying to portray anything Cali.

I always appreciate the feedback from patrons.

Some of the comments on this thread IMH have been OTT and despite explanations from all the mod team it still rumbled on until the point where we have felt forced into a decision we didn't feel was required at this point.
 
JK said:
I am not trying to portray anything Cali.

I always appreciate the feedback from patrons.

Some of the comments on this thread IMH have been OTT and despite explanations from all the mod team it still rumbled on until the point where we have felt forced into a decision we didn't feel was required at this point.
Click to expand...
I'll have another flick through but the last few posts have described the issue well imo; I've also acknowledged that it probs is a good feature from a mods perspective as most kickoffs probs take place during weekends/evenings; should lessen the impact. I see all sides, and I'm not anti ignore in any way whatsoever.

See it from all sides honestly but as I say spoils it sometimes, I notice more on mdt I think when there's a high volume of posts.

A vote probs would be a good idea aye.
 
Bear in mind things like this were introduced because of complaints that threads were "spoiled" by the actions of others. The only actions we are left with is removing users which again draws criticism that it spoils the site. So ultimately we don't have much wriggle room. Maybe that should be the vote instead about what people want to happen to persistently troublesome posters as people seem to want trouble free threads but without any ability to remove any trouble.
 
jakehake said:
Bear in mind things like this were introduced because of complaints that threads were "spoiled" by the actions of others. The only actions we are left with is removing users which again draws criticism that it spoils the site. So ultimately we don't have much wriggle room. Maybe that should be the vote instead about what people want to happen to persistently troublesome posters as people seem to want trouble free threads but without any ability to remove any trouble.
Click to expand...
Is old school ignore not the most appropriate compromise?
 
jakehake said:
It doesn't prevent trolls following people around hence why it became two way
Click to expand...
How would you know a troll is following you if you have them on (one-way) ignore though? I suppose you mean it could be perceived from the context of other replies within the thread...fair enough, I see your point.... but if its that bad that you have troll-stalking (I can only think of one obvious instance of this), I would have though that was against forum rules?
 
Funky Monk said:
How would you know a troll is following you if you have them on (one-way) ignore though? I suppose you mean it could be perceived from the context of other replies within the thread...fair enough, I see your point.... but if its that bad that you have troll-stalking (I can only think of one obvious instance of this), I would have though that was against forum rules?
Click to expand...
One way ignore isn't as subtle as two way which removed the posts completely hence peoples complaints

1625053179360.webp


As per the latter point, refer to post 168
 
jakehake said:
It doesn't prevent trolls following people around hence why it became two way
Click to expand...

I see a benefit when there’s a real troll (allegedly) involved- someone who wants to cause sustained distress (although mostly, said people would be banned).

There will always be grey areas - but I imagine that, a big majority of the time, two-way ignore is being used when it’s not necessary - people taking the easy option to completely insulate themselves from people who grate on them, when one-way ignore would insulate them 95%.

The compromise could perhaps be to make two-way ignore available on request only. Sounds like more work for the mods - but in practice, would it really be much? And would that be worth it for better maintaining the unique ethos of this forum, where we come together with such a wide range of characters?
 
Out of curiosity
I do not ever recall an ignore function when discussing a football match in a pub or a news item
Seems to me that at all too often people are hell bent on proving a point rather than making a point then absorbing people thoughts which in turn maybe offers a different opinion from yours but may just enrich a little in outlook
 
jakehake said:
Bear in mind things like this were introduced because of complaints that threads were "spoiled" by the actions of others. The only actions we are left with is removing users which again draws criticism that it spoils the site. So ultimately we don't have much wriggle room. Maybe that should be the vote instead about what people want to happen to persistently troublesome posters as people seem to want trouble free threads but without any ability to remove any trouble.
Click to expand...
Does the invisible function still work, always a useful short term sin bin?
 
Back
Top