It appears from a mod comment in the second Oscar Pistorius thread that moderating on here is "costing resources" which would suggest that banning people frees up resources and is an easy option rather than closing a thread.
They mod said the thread would remain open but people had to becareful as they couldn't justify the resources put to moderating it.
If DS is having trouble resourcing it's site it doesn't bode well for the future as moderation has never been an issue before.
I imagine having a single mod sitting moderating a single popular thread for the whole day isn't what they are there for. There's a whole forum to moderate.
I feel quite capable of doing that by simply ignoring them. Scolling on to the next post. I don't feel the need to use a button to do so. I don't find it helpful, that's just me, especially as you see their posts quoted anyway if they become part of a discussion.
ETA: I apologise, I realise my 'grown-up' remark seemed like I was having a go at you, I wasn't - I was generalising after responding to your post.
OK, thanks. Yes, you do still see their quoted posts, but I find it cuts down the nuisance factor quite a bit!
Personally, I never use the ignore at all. For a start it's not a true ignore - you still see their posts when it's quoted, defeats the object of the exercise
Secondly, I'm with you - I wouldn't ignore somebody because their opinion is different to mine.
Thirdly, I'm a grown-up, I'm capable of ignoring a post (and we all ignore a plethora of them all the time) or, indeed, a user, without needing a button to help me do so.
This pretty much covers why I don't use the Alert button too
I was of the exact same opinion as you muggsy, and lasted all these years without using the ignore function.......until the last CBB
My ignore list now consists of a single persistent troll who feigns all manner of illnesses/conditions in order to get away with talking a load of repetitive, unintelligible bollocks.
Having them on ignore saves my sanity and lessens the possibility of me getting banned for telling them to STFU with their bullshit - a likely outcome otherwise.
Pressing this button amends offensive posts. It replaces all the distasteful comments with sentences about fluffy kittens and puppies and flowers and all manner of nice things.
We're saying that, for example, if I didn't like what blueblade writes, I click "ignore" and then I can't see his posts but, in addition, he wouldn't be able to see mine as well?
Seems like that'd just lead to a situation where groups of like-minded people only ever saw their own little "slice" of the forum and never had to read a dissenting opinion.
DTV only reading what DTV likes... surely it's a dream of theirs? ;-)
We're saying that, for example, if I didn't like what blueblade writes, I click "ignore" and then I can't see his posts but, in addition, he wouldn't be able to see mine as well?
Seems like that'd just lead to a situation where groups of like-minded people only ever saw their own little "slice" of the forum and never had to read a dissenting opinion.
Yes, I have posted on forums that have used that and it does get a bit like that.
;-)
Also the annoying trolls use it to wind people up as well.
Can't speak for others, but I never ignore people just because their opinion differs from mine. That would make discussion pretty pointless. I only put them on ignore if they're obviously trolls or if their posts are highly unpleasant or offensive.
You're missing the point though.
Others, who simply don't want to listen to an opinion which differs from their own, could use such a system to ensure that nobody who might disagree with them has an opportunity to disagree.
Let's say, for example, you have half a dozen people on DS who think gay people are sub-human scumbags.
That small group of people could "block" anybody who disagrees with them which'd mean that they'd be free to post their shite and nobody who'd previously disagreed with them would ever be able to respond because they wouldn't see the offending posts and anybody who disagreed with them in future could be "blocked" until, eventually, you'd be left with the situation where the forums could be filled with their garbage and nobody who might disagree would be able to dispute anything they wrote.
Also the annoying trolls use it to wind people up as well.
Well, that's the other thing, isn't it?
Trolls tend to want attention and they don't really give a stuff who they get it from.
All that'd happen is that anybody who undermined a troll would get "blocked" by the troll which'd leave the troll free to get attention from the rest of the forum, safe in the knowledge that they could "block" anybody they didn't like and stop them from responding to their shite ever again.
Others, who simply don't want to listen to an opinion which differs from their own, could use such a system to ensure that nobody who might disagree with them has an opportunity to disagree.
You may be right, but I was just responding to a particular point about why people use the Ignore button.
You may be right, but I was just responding to a particular point about why people use the Ignore button.
Well, yeah. You might use the "ignore" function for that purpose but I was pointing out that if it had greater power then other people would find other uses for it.
I don't see how this would work, all you would have to do is have one tab open where you are logged in and one tab where you are not logged in and you could see what the FM has posted.
I don't see how this would work, all you would have to do is have one tab open where you are logged in and one tab where you are not logged in and you could see what the FM has posted.
Well, yeah.
For a "normal" person, it'd be a bit strange to reply to posts that they'd, theoretically, blocked but it'd be easy for a troll to be logged-out, read a bunch of posts about something and then log in and make an antagonistic post on that subject, safe in the knowledge that those who might otherwise disagree would either not see it or not be able to respond.
You've just invented a far more convoluted way of making the determined trolls have to change usernames periodically.
You can't really stop people from doing what they want, or have them behave how you would wish them to behave. The most pragmatic solution is to spell out the rules then enforce them whenever necessary, which is what we have here.
The trick is not to feed the trolls.
If only we didn't, eh? Sometimes, I admit, I 'fall' but it really is the best thing to do. They're obviously doing it to get a rise from people (as well as to vent the nastier side of their persona in a way that circumvents face-to-face confrontation). I say 'they're...not all trolls are nasty. Some can be quite funny. I'm referring to the nasty ones.
It appears from a mod comment in the second Oscar Pistorius thread that moderating on here is "costing resources" which would suggest that banning people frees up resources and is an easy option rather than closing a thread.
They mod said the thread would remain open but people had to becareful as they couldn't justify the resources put to moderating it.
If DS is having trouble resourcing it's site it doesn't bode well for the future as moderation has never been an issue before.
You've misunderstood the post you're referring to. The moderation team has other priorities and spending it in a single thread (when there is a whole forum) is not productive. A lot of time was spent moderating that thread without considering the number of alerts, bans and queries we had to deal with. We aren't going to do that again for a similar thread on the same topic.
Thanks for your suggestion but there are no plans to change the moderation policy at this time. This thread has been closed.
Comments
OK, thanks. Yes, you do still see their quoted posts, but I find it cuts down the nuisance factor quite a bit!
My ignore list now consists of a single persistent troll who feigns all manner of illnesses/conditions in order to get away with talking a load of repetitive, unintelligible bollocks.
Having them on ignore saves my sanity and lessens the possibility of me getting banned for telling them to STFU with their bullshit - a likely outcome otherwise.
Pressing this button amends offensive posts. It replaces all the distasteful comments with sentences about fluffy kittens and puppies and flowers and all manner of nice things.
The niceify button, making DS delightful.
DTV only reading what DTV likes... surely it's a dream of theirs? ;-)
GET A HAIRCUT!!...the sixties ended decades ago!
Yes, I have posted on forums that have used that and it does get a bit like that.
;-)
Also the annoying trolls use it to wind people up as well.
cheers
You're missing the point though.
Others, who simply don't want to listen to an opinion which differs from their own, could use such a system to ensure that nobody who might disagree with them has an opportunity to disagree.
Let's say, for example, you have half a dozen people on DS who think gay people are sub-human scumbags.
That small group of people could "block" anybody who disagrees with them which'd mean that they'd be free to post their shite and nobody who'd previously disagreed with them would ever be able to respond because they wouldn't see the offending posts and anybody who disagreed with them in future could be "blocked" until, eventually, you'd be left with the situation where the forums could be filled with their garbage and nobody who might disagree would be able to dispute anything they wrote.
Trolls tend to want attention and they don't really give a stuff who they get it from.
All that'd happen is that anybody who undermined a troll would get "blocked" by the troll which'd leave the troll free to get attention from the rest of the forum, safe in the knowledge that they could "block" anybody they didn't like and stop them from responding to their shite ever again.
You may be right, but I was just responding to a particular point about why people use the Ignore button.
Well, yeah. You might use the "ignore" function for that purpose but I was pointing out that if it had greater power then other people would find other uses for it.
What a strange thing to write.
Well, yeah.
For a "normal" person, it'd be a bit strange to reply to posts that they'd, theoretically, blocked but it'd be easy for a troll to be logged-out, read a bunch of posts about something and then log in and make an antagonistic post on that subject, safe in the knowledge that those who might otherwise disagree would either not see it or not be able to respond.
So from the troll's point of view, they're posting and everyone is ignoring them; from everyone else's point of view, the troll doesn't exist.
Cheers.
If only we didn't, eh? Sometimes, I admit, I 'fall' but it really is the best thing to do. They're obviously doing it to get a rise from people (as well as to vent the nastier side of their persona in a way that circumvents face-to-face confrontation). I say 'they're...not all trolls are nasty. Some can be quite funny. I'm referring to the nasty ones.
You've misunderstood the post you're referring to. The moderation team has other priorities and spending it in a single thread (when there is a whole forum) is not productive. A lot of time was spent moderating that thread without considering the number of alerts, bans and queries we had to deal with. We aren't going to do that again for a similar thread on the same topic.
Thanks for your suggestion but there are no plans to change the moderation policy at this time. This thread has been closed.