Anyways, Another_Mage, if you know how to write such a script, that would be SUPER AWESOME!
I have a rough draft of the script completed.
It works great for me, however, unless you know how to write Javascript, it's still rather difficult to add/remove people from the ignore list.
I'll see if I can make it more user-friendly tomorrow.
|
...I don't think we have any interest in actually hiding posts. Either a post is visible to all, or it's not. Anything else leads to multiple fragmented simultaneous not-quite-conversations.
I'm imagining a bunch of drunks at a party all talking past each other trying to make their point while ignoring what everybody else is saying. Maybe that's a bad analogy but it's reasonably close to what I think could happen (perhaps without the drunkeness).
I don't know; given the content of some threads, I can well believe that people were totally schnozzled before they put finger to keyboard!
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have completed a user-friendly version of the script. There are some rough edges I'd like to smooth out, but it's functional enough to release to users.
Installation
In order to make use of this you need three things, and you are recommended to install them in this order:
1. Firefox
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/upgrade.html
2. Greasemonkey
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/748/
3. another_mage's paizo_ignore script
http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~meade/greasemonkey/paizo_ignore.user.js
Usage
On the messageboards, where you typically see "Flag | List | Reply" you will now see "Ignore | Flag | List | Reply". If you click "Ignore", all of that person's posts will immediately disappear. They will also be added to your personal ignore list; none of their posts will show up on any future threads that you browse.
If you decide you would like to stop ignoring somebody, scroll down to the very bottom of the page and you will see something like this:
Ignored: DeathQuaker | KenderKin | TriOmegaZero |
Click the name of the person you would like to remove from the ignore list. IMPORTANT: Their posts will not reappear immediately. You will need to reload the page in order to see the posts again. This is one of those rough edges I mentioned at the beginning.
Notes
- This is a greasemonkey script running in the user's browser on their own computer. If you are not running the script, there will be absolutely no difference in your online experience. (The script runs locally for those who install it, not on Paizo's computers.)
- I've given the script quite a workout while creating it, however, it may contain bugs. If it starts to adversely affect your online experience, click the Greasemonkey icon in the lower right-hand corner of your browser window. It should turn gray, thereby disabling Greasemonkey and the script.
- The script is licensed under the GNU General Public License v3+. Generally, this means you are free to modify and share, as long as you share-alike. If you have any questions about the license terms, contact me or check the GNU website.
I am really at a loss as to understand why anyone would object to this. It is an individual preference. Do you feel you have the RIGHT to heard by me? If not, then why do you care if I have the ability to not see your posts.
And in my view, implementing an "Ignore" feature is actually MORE heavy-handed than deleting individual posts on a case-by-case basis. It means that the judgement is taken out of the moderators' hands. And as Kobold Cleaver pointed out, it takes away the power even to apologize.
I don't believe I have the right to be heard by anybody. But if I say something that offends you, and you put me on your "Ignore" list, and I post an apology that you can't read, you'd better believe that I'd care. An "Ignore" function would do nothing to make me like this website more. Clearly, some feel differently.
If this is what turns you on to posting here, you have just demonstrated why an ignore feature would be useful. No sarcasm meant.
I believe that you COULD go hugely too far - for instance, you could fill a post with bigotry, libel, profanity, and illegal material - and the Paizo staff will simply delete your post and put up a warning to cut it out. It won't get you banned. Many times, I've seen a thread go on for PAGES full of flaming and trolling that literally made me physically nauseous before the Paizo staff resorted to stepping in and shutting the thread down.And that's part of what I love about this website. Sorry, DeathQuaker, but I'm firmly in the opposition camp.
The point is that I feel I'm being HEARD when I post onto this website, even when my opinion is unpopular, as it is in many, many cases. The existence of an "Ignore" function would send me a message that my opinion - and those of many other people whom I feel ought to be heard - will be LESS heard.
To reiterate: I don't feel I have the right to be heard by ANYONE. But if I felt I weren't being heard on this site, I'd post less, read less, and spend more time on other sites instead. And in time, buy fewer Paizo products and more products from other companies. This site IS what first made me a Paizo customer, and getting business is the primary purpose of a commercial website.
The Universal Brotherhood of Trolls (Local 2487) demands that I be appointed arbiter of said Trollpoints, and paid a salary commesurate with my status.Trollpoints?
Best.
Idea.
Ever.
"We are gonna say no, but would you accept Deep fried paladin or crunchy kitten nachos?"
That's cool; anyone got any tips for switching off the avatars, so I don't look like I'm goofing off at work?
You could use a one-line Greasemonkey script to hide all images on the page:
GM_addStyle("img { visibility:hidden; }");
However, it doesn't get rid of the sidebar, header, or footer.
Unless you're at a small company with an incompetent system administrator, please remember that your web requests are probably being logged.
Thanks, Another_Mage, I'll give you some feedback as I use it!
@Snorter: You probably already know this, but most all browsers have an option to not load images AT ALL (often, to save bandwidth), though this isn't usually on a per-website basis as Another_Mage's script should.
Thanks another_mage!
"We are gonna say no, but would you accept Deep fried paladin or crunchy kitten nachos?"
Mmmmm, Kitten nachos. Deal. You drive a tough bargain.
To reiterate: I don't feel I have the right to be heard by ANYONE. But if I felt I weren't being heard on this site, I'd post less, read less, and spend more time on other sites instead.
In which most actually have ignore features? AFAICT, Paizo's board is a somewhat rare breed in which it *doesn't* have a lot of basic messageboard functionalities.
I suspect, though, that your 'reduced buying due to the existence of normal messageboard functionality' is enough of an outlier that it probably will have zero noticeable effects (both at Paizo and any other company).
(But I do see your general point; and I don't bother with ignore features either. Though I am still waiting for the holy grail of ignore functionality, which I mentioned earlier in the thread - being able to put myself on other people's ignore lists!)
Once again, it looks like I did a bad job of expressing myself. I'm going to try yet again.
The online community at paizo.com is awesome. I have never seen any other online community that even approaches this order of magnitude of awesomeness. And one of the many, many factors of that is its ability to listen. The existence of an Ignore function, to me, mars that image somewhat.
In regards to some of your specific points:
I suspect, though, that your 'reduced buying due to the existence of normal messageboard functionality' is enough of an outlier that it probably will have zero noticeable effects (both at Paizo and any other company).
I hope that I didn't give the impression that I suffer some delusion that I, alone, matter in the grand scheme of things. I don't. In fact, I was reluctant to post my opinion on this thread - except to bring up the point that an Ignore function would interfere with a fair debate - until Kobold Cleaver posted comments like...
...one of the reasons I love Paizo is because they're so reluctant to pass judgement...
...which assured me that I wasn't alone in that opinion. Only I would expand that remark to include not only Paizo, but many, many people in the paizo.com online community. So Kobold Cleaver's post encouraged me to speak my mind on the matter, in the hopes that there are many more out there who might agree. To reiterate: I alone am nothing. But maybe there are other people out there who also became Paizo customers - or who remain Paizo customers - because of this website and the way it is run. People who are saying "Paizo, you done good."
In which most actually have ignore features? AFAICT, Paizo's board is a somewhat rare breed in which it *doesn't* have a lot of basic messageboard functionalities.
And now I can't help but rant about one of my pet peeves. I write software for a living. If my company's clients stopped saying "We want new features," I'd be out of a job. That said, I hate - on a philosophical level, anyway - the fact that software companies keep insisting on adding to their software more bells and whistles which I never wanted and which makes that software stop working correctly for my purposes. More functionality means more bugs and more problems. It can also mean more difficulty of use, in some cases. Speaking for myself - and again, I speak for myself only in the hopes that others might agree, not because I think that I matter - a website or software package with more functionality is NOT necessarily better; in some cases, it can be worse.
There are some enhancements I would like to see on this website, but not at the expense of its good aspects. And the ability to ignore is not, IMO, a good thing.
@Aaron: Overall, I say get over worrying if "somebody" is ignoring you, because obviously all the people conversing with you here are paying attention to your opinions. The existence or not of a technical Ignore feature like Another_Mage's script in no way makes people pay attention to you - relying on the lack of such feature to 'make' people interact with you doesn't seem like the best approach...
And honestly, If you're respectful of others, willing to share what you know and learn what you don't, and able to share a mutual enjoyment with others, I think 99% of people here are never going to THINK of banning you - I know the thought has never REMOTELY crossed my mind, personally.
If nobody EVER responds to anything you say or write, then sure, you might have a situation you don't like, but if you are interacting with people semi-successfully, focusing on other, hypothetical people who aren't interacting with you is rather looking at the glass half-empty (or quarter-empty) when you could be enjoying the interaction you want. Just don't over-look or take for granted what you have going, is all I'm saying.
@Aaron: Overall, I say get over worrying if "somebody" is ignoring you, because obviously all the people conversing with you here are paying attention to your opinions.
Again, it's not just a matter of people ignoring ME. It's a matter of ignoring others in general that bugs me.
The existence or not of a technical Ignore feature like Another_Mage's script in no way makes people pay attention to you - relying on the lack of such feature to 'make' people interact with you doesn't seem like the best approach...
True. In fact, these boards are so prolific that I don't think it humanly possible to read ALL the posts. But the idea that you have a setting that will actually HIDE posts would send a bad message to me.
And honestly, If you're respectful of others, willing to share what you know and learn what you don't, and able to share a mutual enjoyment with others, I think 99% of people here are never going to THINK of banning you - I know the thought has never REMOTELY crossed my mind, personally.
Again, I'm not fighting for myself. I am nothing. But I've observed that some very good, well-written, well-educated, informative posts are written by trolls. I've read many posts I thought fantastic until they continued with a line like "If you disagree with me, then too bad for you 'cause you're wrong," or "Why don't you learn what you're talking about before you post?" A line like that may ruin my mood and upset my digestion, but darn it all, the rest of the post TAUGHT me something. And may teach others as well.
Just don't over-look or take for granted what you have going, is all I'm saying.
Believe me, I don't. If I took it for granted, I wouldn't be speaking my mind about it now. I want Paizo to know how much I like this website - and hope that others convey that message to Paizo as well - so that the Paizo staff doesn't think everyone wants that to change.
Aaron: FWIW, I agree that an ignore feature runs somewhat counter to the spirit of these forums. That said, I'd still like to see the filter function I proposed if only to make individual threads that do run amok more manageable.
I think in the entire time I was a senior administrator for the Online Gaming League, I ignored maybe 3 people over the course of 7+ years. Even then that was in live chat and always temporary in nature. I can't say that I've ever needed an ignore feature on a message board — even amongst competitive, angst-ridden, ego-tripping FPS players when I was the guy calling them on their BS. Anyone that bad typically warranted an outright ban for simply failing to being a decent human being.
At least those who do feel such a need now have a solution that should seemingly work for them. Given that it's client-based, and essentially available only by word-of-mouth, I'd say it's a non-issue in the grand scheme of things.
Consider yourself ignored...
Smurfs consider yourselves smurfed...
Trolls I have taken away all your troll points they will be re-assigned tomorrow...
Evil consider yourself smited...
|
There is way too much bilge and spam posts on these forums. Some posters do this as an attempt at humor while many just seek to derail a thread which they feel should end.
I think a way to remove those posts while still discussing the topic with those who care would be a good feature. I don't think a cadre of threadcrappers who decide to bomb a thread should have that much power to derail and drive off posters.
It has been mentioned to just ignore posts from trolls - part of the problem is that sometimes need to wade through two to three pages of full on troll spam + chain responses and nonsense just to find one legit op/subject response buried in those pages.
Being able to collapse posts from certain users (plus aliases) for a specific thread would actually help some posters stay on topic.
There is way too much bilge and spam posts on these forums. Some posters do this as an attempt at humor while many just seek to derail a thread which they feel should end.
I think a way to remove those posts while still discussing the topic with those who care would be a good feature. I don't think a cadre of threadcrappers who decide to bomb a thread should have that much power to derail and drive off posters.
A way to just filter out the results when a bunch of posters decide a thread has run its course and Sm*rfCr*ap any further conversation to the nether regions would be greatly appreciated. I haven't seen anything else around here I'd want to filter, but that stunt bugs me. Maybe the threads are 'finished', maybe not, but why should they decide by disrupting everyone else's conversation instead of letting the other participants finish or not as they choose?
Edited for clarification of point.
Smurf.
THIS ... IS ... SMURFTA!!!!!!!!!!!
Mmmmm......smurffff
So who exactly finds this threadcrapping amusing? If we're not going to get an ignore feature, is it possible to restrict this idiocy to the off-topic areas?
|
|
I don't think Paizo cares enough about their boards to restrict the usual suspects from threadcrapping or even to provide an ignore feature.
It's just one of those things you have to deal with with some posters here - they don't like a topic, they crap it closed.
You pretty much need a non-volatile gaming subject that these guys are not interested in reading if you want to get a good back and forth without the shutdown/threadcrappage.
Yeah, we need an ignore feature ASAPI don't think Paizo cares enough about their boards to restrict the usual suspects from threadcrapping or even to provide an ignore feature.
It's just one of those things you have to deal with with some posters here - they don't like a topic, they crap it closed.
You pretty much need a non-volatile gaming subject that these guys are not interested in reading if you want to get a good back and forth without the shutdown/threadcrappage.
Yeah, we need an ignore feature ASAP
I don't think Paizo cares enough about their boards to restrict the usual suspects from threadcrapping or even to provide an ignore feature.
It's just one of those things you have to deal with with some posters here - they don't like a topic, they crap it closed.
You pretty much need a non-volatile gaming subject that these guys are not interested in reading if you want to get a good back and forth without the shutdown/threadcrappage.
Yeah, we need an ignore feature ASAP
Edit: BTW Brian - looks like you caught their attention
Just in case they decide to delete.
Link.
Brian E. Harris: There is much anger in this one.
If people don't see the value of the little blue gnomes, either they haven't seen them stomp out a combusting thread, or they love to bask in everburning flames.
Lol
Auxmaulos, I agree with you, that it is frustrating to see the threadcrapping going on in what could be a productive conversation. This is exactly the kind of "snarky disrespect" that flies under the radar, and if you start to flag it all, you make yourself look like a jerk. (I wonder what would happen if you did start to flag it all...) But yeah, again, that's why I like the ignore idea, but now I'm repeating myself.
At the same time, I do not think the issue is that "Paizo doesn't care." I think they want their messageboards to be a nice place to be, and compared to some other boards (some less moderated, some more) it's overall generally civil (it's just when it's NOT it's when it's very upsetting). There may be a sense of not wanting to fix what isn't, comparatively speaking, broken (or only mildly leaking).
I can understand their hands are tied a little. Finding that fine line between "well-moderated" and "being restrictive to the point of uncalled for censorship" can be hard. Implementing new rules does come with the risk of losing sometimes valued members (though also with the reward of making other people happier; still sometimes the lesser evil of leaving the majority simply mildly discontent seems preferable).
The flagging system helps, and Gary Teter's post upthread suggests that's what they rely on for moderation, but it only works if people use it.
As for the little blue people, I'm sorry they get misused. I like the idea of them popping in on a this is srs bsns kind of thread but they just get used to spam people. (And I don't want this to be a srs bsns thread, I just want people to feel free to discuss their feelings on the matter without feeling disrespected.)
Auxmaulous, I'll admit that I don't understand your joke, so maybe this is the wrong reaction, but if you're serious when you say...
I don't think Paizo cares enough about their boards to restrict the usual suspects from threadcrapping or even to provide an ignore feature.
...then I disagree. Sure Paizo cares about its boards! Think of all the times James Jacobs answered questions only minutes after they were asked. Think of all the times he answered questions in threads hundreds of posts long, in such a way as to demonstrate that he must have read the thread at least fairly thoroughly, and probably VERY thoroughly.
I don't mean to single out James Jacobs. The same goes for Erik Mona, Vic Wertz, and a handful of others. They spend some time on these messageboards. Don't we all enjoy talking on these boards? Why should the Paizo staff members feel differently? The only difference is that the Paizo staff can justify it as "work" (even though they have a ton of work to do, like writing Paizo books and such.)
So the members of Paizo care about this site, and I'd go further to contend that they designed it the way they wanted to.
I don't think Paizo cares enough about their boards to restrict the usual suspects from threadcrapping or even to provide an ignore feature.
It's just one of those things you have to deal with with some posters here - they don't like a topic, they crap it closed.
You pretty much need a non-volatile gaming subject that these guys are not interested in reading if you want to get a good back and forth without the shutdown/threadcrappage.
Yeah, we need an ignore feature ASAPI don't think Paizo cares enough about their boards to restrict the usual suspects from threadcrapping or even to provide an ignore feature.
It's just one of those things you have to deal with with some posters here - they don't like a topic, they crap it closed.
You pretty much need a non-volatile gaming subject that these guys are not interested in reading if you want to get a good back and forth without the shutdown/threadcrappage.
Yeah, we need an ignore feature ASAP
I don't think Paizo cares enough about their boards to restrict the usual suspects from threadcrapping or even to provide an ignore feature.It's just one of those things you have to deal with with some posters here - they don't like a topic, they crap it closed.
You pretty much need a non-volatile gaming subject that these guys are not interested in reading if you want to get a good back and forth without the shutdown/threadcrappage.
Yeah, we need an ignore feature ASAP
Edit: BTW Brian - looks like you caught their attention
Just in case they decide to delete.
Link.
Brian E. Harris: There is much anger in this one.Lol
To summarize, it may be functional, or amusing, or both. I've never seen a good back-and-forth discussion of opposing views smnrfed. What amazes me is that the kind of nasty, irrational, rage-filled-but-ears-plugged threads that I have unashamedly been a part of smnrfing are not considered thread-crapping.
Actually, DeathQuaker, the little blue people make for an interesting point, which I could tie into my theme that the Paizo staffers designed this website they wanted to: Somebody intentionally uploaded pictures of the blue people, and threw in code to say "Every time the five-letter S-word is used, make one of THOSE pictures the avatar." The designers of the site even went so far as to include anything resembling that five-letter S-word. It obviously wasn't an accident. So I'd say that Paizo WANTED to add a little levity.
|
While Paizo has made it clear an Ignore feature is NOT forthcoming, I'd still sure appreciate some sort of filtering mechanism.
I'd like to have an auto-filter setting in my preferences that says:
Collapse posts with the string: <enter string, most specifically for me, the little blue people>
Collapse posts by: <enter username>
I find all of the posts that include the word "sm..f" to be a complete waste of time and would prefer just to skip past them.
I'd LIKE to be able to just skip past posts made by specific users.
Actually, DeathQuaker, the little blue people make for an interesting point, which I could tie into my theme that the Paizo staffers designed this website they wanted to: Somebody intentionally uploaded pictures of the blue people, and threw in code to say "Every time the five-letter S-word is used, make one of THOSE pictures the avatar." The designers of the site even went so far as to include anything resembling that five-letter S-word. It obviously wasn't an accident. So I'd say that Paizo WANTED to add a little levity.
I am aware of that; what I'm saying is I think some people abuse the feature. Please note this is just an observation; I am not suggesting the feature itself change.
They have appeared in much needed threads before; of that I am also well aware. :)
d20pfsrd.com: I bet if Greasemonkey can be made to add an ignore feature, it could also be made to do that. It's not a universal feature, no, but a currently existing solution.
I find all of the posts that include the word "sm..f" to be a complete waste of time...
Not quite all. Occasionally, someone writes a serious, meaningful post, and throws in a little joke with that word. I remember once doing that myself, last year.
Another word: Our definitions of Smnrfing probably also vary greatly. If you're a hater of the little blue guys, then any appearance of them qualifies. But by practitioners of the art, it is not the mere appearance of, let us call it an S-post, but their swarming that constitutes a smnrfing. A functional smnrfing may aim to douse the flamey thread. In this case, their appearance, which hardly qualifies as a smnrfing, was to remind folks of another option besides the existing flag system and the attempt to enable ignoring. (Was there a slight perverse joy in knowing that some would like to ignore little blue gnomes, but couldn't? Well, I won't ask my colleagues in this thread, since it is not a confessional.) At the same time, there was some low-level, well-intentioned levity occasioned by the topic of what the masters of these boards have given us and might give us.
For those S-haters: Ask yourselves, not simply why you hate them, but why you post about them so that you smnrf yourself? I think there is something in you, wanting to get out. ;)
As for ignoring: I understand simply not being able to abide certain posters. I have memorized a certain avatar, and trained myself to skip over it every time it appears without reading what is said, unless I am in the mood to practice resistance or inquire if it might be one of its minority users. One can make oneself very adept at this, I assure.
As for the little blue people, I'm sorry they get misused. I like the idea of them popping in on a this is srs bsns kind of thread but they just get used to spam people. (And I don't want this to be a srs bsns thread, I just want people to feel free to discuss their feelings on the matter without feeling disrespected.)
DQ: They may be misused, I won't claim to know all their uses. But I have also seen them get discussions back on track. I think a survey of their uses would find that they are responses more to people's actions, than attempts to disrespect people's feelings.
EDIT: Human nature being what it is, of course they WILL get misused. But if we were going to get rid of anything that is misused, we'd have to get rid of messageboards altogether.
|
|
Somebody intentionally uploaded pictures of the blue people, and threw in code to say "Every time the five-letter S-word is used, make one of THOSE pictures the avatar." The designers of the site even went so far as to include anything resembling that five-letter S-word. It obviously wasn't an accident. So I'd say that Paizo WANTED to add a little levity.
And let's not forget some other gems:
- The Smurf version Kobold Cleaver. Hilarious! And, boy, was he pissed.
- The random pirate talk inserted into posts on the original Untitled thread. We never did figure out exactly what parameters Gary set to trigger that. In fact, we think he changed them up from time to time.
I don't think Paizo cares enough about their boardsWait, what? Really? Honestly?
I think I will choose to believe that you are kidding.
Surely it was just the heat of the moment, PostMonster.
As for ignoring: I understand simply not being able to abide certain posters. I have memorized a certain avatar, and trained myself to skip over it every time it appears without reading what is said, unless I am in the mood to practice resistance or inquire if it might be one of its minority users. One can make oneself very adept at this, I assure.
<pulls the curlies on his 'stache>
As for ignoring: I understand simply not being able to abide certain posters. I have memorized a certain avatar, and trained myself to skip over it every time it appears without reading what is said, unless I am in the mood to practice resistance or inquire if it might be one of its minority users. One can make oneself very adept at this, I assure.<pulls the curlies on his 'stache>
Ooo, my favorite avatar! And in this case, he's not being misused!
|
|
As for ignoring: I understand simply not being able to abide certain posters. I have memorized a certain avatar, and trained myself to skip over it every time it appears without reading what is said, unless I am in the mood to practice resistance or inquire if it might be one of its minority users. One can make oneself very adept at this, I assure.
The only problem with auto-ignoring by avatar is that multiple people can have the same avatar.
Also, its not always about not being able to abide certain posters. For me sometimes its just that I find that I don't value the comments of certain posters very highly. I don't want to waste my time having to skim past posts about what I feel are nonsense or not even tangentially related to the subject being discussed. There are some posters who can barely register a cogent thought let alone an interesting post and it would save me time not having to accidentally dip into their post and then realize "oh yeah its THIS guy..." Is that offensive? Maybe, but then I'm sure many people may consider ME that guy and would appreciate not accidentally stumbling into my random blathering posts.
As for the little blue people, I'm sorry they get misused. I like the idea of them popping in on a this is srs bsns kind of thread but they just get used to spam people. (And I don't want this to be a srs bsns thread, I just want people to feel free to discuss their feelings on the matter without feeling disrespected.)DQ: They may be misused, I won't claim to know all their uses. But I have also seen them get discussions back on track. I think a survey of their uses would find that they are responses more to people's actions, than attempts to disrespect people's feelings.
EDIT: Human nature being what it is, of course they WILL get misused. But if we were going to get rid of anything that is misused, we'd have to get rid of messageboardsaltogether.
It appears I must repeat myself:
I am aware of that; what I'm saying is I think some people abuse the feature. Please note this is just an observation; I am not suggesting the feature itself change.They have appeared in much needed threads before; of that I am also well aware. :)
I also appreciate the value of the smurf to show that we are not taking things far too seriously. :)
Hey! I have something to contribute once in awhile.
EDIT: Okay, you got me. I have nothing.
All this discussion of improper smnrf use makes me wonder - what exactly would be the proper use of them? Making gold?
STOP IGNORING ME, DEMMIT!!!!!!
It appears I must repeat myself:I also appreciate the value of the smurf to show that we are not taking things far too seriously. :)
I am aware of that; what I'm saying is I think some people abuse the feature. Please note this is just an observation; I am not suggesting the feature itself change.They have appeared in much needed threads before; of that I am also well aware. :)
My smurf. :(
So I'd say that Paizo WANTED to add a little levity.
Still, I wouldn't mind the ability to ignore at least the blue people posts. In some threads, that would clear up half or more of the replies.