Ignore function

[caesar]

We had an ignore function so you didn't need to read the posts of those who come to troll and irritate. It would come in very handy and prevent a lot of personal attacks.

[maplesyrup]

More and more people just drift away from Mapleleafweb because the personal attacks and trolling here are ignored by the operators.

[Cartman]

Yeah, that function sounds great. The forum survives on honest and sincere exchanges of information. Intent to disrupt ruins the objective.

[Tawasakm]

It sounds like a good idea caesar just so long as none of us start abusing the feature by just ignoring people who persistently disagree with us.

I'm also curious to know if discussion ever got confused with such a function? After all some of the posts you may have been reading could have been referring to posts you're not actually seeing etc. And the same could be true for others. If everyone is ignoring different people I could see a problem.

Perhaps we're just better banning trollers?

Or perhaps I'm just being overly cautious of a function I've never used. Seems like something that could be trialled.

[Argus]

We had an ignore function so you didn't need to read the posts of those who come to troll and irritate. It would come in very handy and prevent a lot of personal attacks.

The best response is to not make personal attacks. Can you honestly say you haven't been guilty of this?

I find some of the people here, naming no names in particular, quite irritating at times. But if I ignored everyone who disagreed with me I'd have nothing to respond to.

[Guest eureka]

I think that some of what are termed personal attacks are just jabs that are common in the heat of debate. Perhaps some of us are a little prickly. I know ar times I can be and it is from frustration over some belaboured point mostly.

I would never use an ignore function. Tawasakm's cautions are well founded in my opinion. Even "trolls" sometimes have valid opinions.

[August1991]

My understanding of a "troll" is a poster who signs on, posts a controversial comment and then walks away leaving frenzied debate in his wake. (I think the term troll comes from computer games - perhaps Dungeons & Dragons.)

Why would anyone want to troll this forum? Some of our regular posters (including me perhaps) manage to create mayhem anyway. IOW, I don't know if I could tell the difference between a troll and a serious poster.

I find the occasional total whacko posts charmingly amusing.

On Rabble, a troll seems to be any poster who opposes the so-called "progressive" agenda. That is obviously not the case here because we agree on almost nothing - let alone an agenda.

As to the Ignore Function, I'm not against it but I don't think it's a priority. This forum appears to be an off the shelf package. I doubt such a function exists. The same applies for a spell check function.

I would like more policing so that new threads are moved to the correct category. (Take note MS.)

[caesar]

Perhaps we're just better banning trollers?

Easier said than done. Trollers come in just to disagree and make outrageous statements to irritate. When they get booted; they generally come back using a different email address and name.

Some people that simply always disagree are not worth getting your dander up. When they are unwilling to even consider your post and are closed mind. That doesn't make for a real discussion. Yes, it does make you stoop to their level at times. With ignore, you need not listen to the irritation. If someone is not willing to give any consideration to your points; why let them bother you??

[Tawasakm]

Easier said than done. Trollers come in just to disagree and make outrageous statements to irritate. When they get booted; they generally come back using a different email address and name.

Well what you say is very true caesar. It is a problem without a definitive solution. Trollers, as you say, can continue to find ways in.

My concern is that the function you propose can lead to other kinds of abuses which could effect the quality of debate amongst those here we know are not trollers. If we have the option to ignore any poster and use it in the wrong way our discussions will necessarily suffer an adverse affect.

So perhaps in the interest of preserving the current level of quality it is better to maintain the status quo (not completely satisfactory) state of affairs.

[Greg]

While the ignore function is not a "bad" idea, it is unfortunately not something that can be implemented very easier. Because the software the runs this board isn't a custom solution, we are unable to simply add this feature.

But to be honest, I do not think trolls have had much of a negative effect in these forums. Sure there's a been a few of them, but I've managed to ban them before they did much damage.

Remember, the secret to marginalizing trolls is to simple not feed them. If you don't respond to their antics, they'll slink away to find a more responsive audience.

[Slavik44]

My understanding of a "troll" is a poster who signs on, posts a controversial comment and then walks away leaving frenzied debate in his wake. (I think the term troll comes from computer games - perhaps Dungeons & Dragons.)

1. [From the Usenet group alt.folklore.urban] To utter a posting on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames; or, the post itself. Derives from the phrase "trolling for newbies" which in turn comes from mainstream "trolling", a style of fishing in which one trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite. The well-constructed troll is a post that induces lots of newbies and flamers to make themselves look even more clueless than they already do, while subtly conveying to the more savvy and experienced that it is in fact a deliberate troll. If you don't fall for the joke, you get to be in on it. 2. An individual who chronically trolls in sense 1; regularly posts specious arguments, flames or personal attacks to a newsgroup, discussion list, or in email for no other purpose than to annoy someone or disrupt a discussion. Trolls are recognizable by the fact that the have no real interest in learning about the topic at hand - they simply want to utter flame bait. Like the ugly creatures they are named after, they exhibit no redeeming characteristics, and as such, they are recognized as a lower form of life on the net, as in, "Oh, ignore him, he's just a troll." 3. [berkeley] Computer lab monitor. A popular campus job for CS student. Duties include helping newbies and ensuring that lab policies are followed. Probably so-called because it involves lurking in dark cavelike corners.

Some people claim that the troll (sense 1) is properly a narrower category than flame bait, that a troll is categorized by containing some assertion that is wrong but not overtly controversial. See also Troll-O-Meter.