By "ignore user," I mean "ignore posts by this user." I know that someone made a suggestion to also "ignore" posts that refer to the "ignorable" user by name, but I haven't carried it out that far.

As iRabbit said, less bickering back and forth. There have been many (Finance) threads that have been threadjacked by a couple of people arguing with eachother, making it difficult for the rest of us to read the meaningful posts.

The suggestion by (one of) the mods to simply set your filter to screen out messages with a certain amount of red doesn't quite make it. I don't want or need to rely on the opinion of others as to whether a certain person's posts are useful. I'd rather "ignore" those who have offended, annoyed or just plain bored me.

I seem to recall (another?) mod suggesting that an "ignore user" function would hurt the feelings of the ignored person. How, may I ask, would that person know s/he was being "ignored"?

I am definitely for this option. Another option I'd like to see (don't know if it's possible here, but in some chat rooms it is) is choosing to have certain people not see your posts. So, if a user didn't want me to see their posts they would put me on their list, etc.

TM1 said:Makes me wonder why someone would want to HIDE from other members. The only reason for something like that it sounds like someone want be posting trash and not be held accountable for it. We have the function right now to see if someone is logged on, you lurk all day long, it is no secret.

Again, none of your concern. We ALL have a right to make suggestions here, like it or not. Keep your personal feelings out of it for once.

IAmStingRay said:There are much better uses of your time than this. If someone is hurting the community or an individual they should be banned, not ignored.The problem is, a malicious user/troll can cause a lot of damage (in terms of cluttering threads) before they are banned. If the number of people ignoring a user crosses a certain threshold, that user should be investigated for possible banning.

Personally I wouldn't set up an ignore user feature for individual users that frequently, most of the time it would be tied in with low reputation.

jayK said:PML said:I am definitely for this option. Another option I'd like to see (don't know if it's possible here, but in some chat rooms it is) is choosing to have certain people not see your posts. So, if a user didn't want me to see their posts they would put me on their list, etc.I don't think that necessarily adds any value. If you don't want to interact with someone, put them on your ignore list. If they see one of your posts and reply, you won't see it anyway, so why would you care?

I see what you are saying to some degree.

A girl can dream though.

Example:

someone who continuously posts inane threads (which we ALL do sometimes) and then changes the title of the thread, the content of the thread 5 or 6 times in an hour, asks the same questions over and over (and by now we know he's REALLY not looking for a laptop), or posts useless comments into other threads.

The useless comments in other threads isn't really THAT big a deal to me, but ignoring a user like that would save me the aggravation of opening a thread created by that user a second time because he changed the title and I thought it might actually be a real question (silly me).

I think, also, sometimes there are people who just get under your skin. It's easier to follow FW guidelines and ignore, if we truly could ignore all their posts.

Cons: You could miss some funny stuff that's posted in some of those threads. Because of this, I honestly think that people will think twice before using this feature, but certainly there comes a time that the benefits outweigh the negatives.

Thanks for listening.

jayK said:ThursdaysChild said:By "ignore user," I mean "ignore posts by this user." I know that someone made a suggestion to also "ignore" posts that refer to the "ignorable" user by name, but I haven't carried it out that far.IMHO the ignore user feature (when activated) should also by default ignore all posts that quote an ignore user. This would completely eliminate many flame wars...otherwise the flame war would still be visible and would clutter up the thread. The point behind ignore user is to increase the signal-to-noise ratio.Good idea but will be tougher to implement. Not everyone use the quote function properly.

I agree with what shopliftinginva said above. Enen though I'll miss some funny stuff, life is too short to read some posting which only purpose is to insult not only on this board but on others forums as well.

I actually would rate the priority of a "rating" system ahead of "ignore user" but that's just me. The reason I haven't been pushing for that lately was because I sense FW's direction for the past few years has been a desire not to "hurt" the feeling of any potential user so I thought there's little chance of that ever happening. However, lately, I feel there might be more of a desire on FW's staff to listen more to its current user base... there's hope

I'm all for choice! I like an ignore feature. Make it a toggle switch, with on and off as needed. I remember when we had something similar before...problem there was you'd still see the person quoted by others. So, it all became an indirect flame war rather than in in your face flame war. I like the block user button re: PMs. I'd love to have something similar to ignore users that (as someone said) annoy, irritate, bore, or in general offer nothing positive to the community.

Others are free to ignore the ignore capability. Choice!

/squeaky wheel voice on

PLEASE!!

/squeaky wheel voice off