| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can't stop the bumrush, Mikaze.
[Does a lewd dance]
It's not like the goblins have got much to show off...
[Shows off gobliny pecs and shiny green six-pack]
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, thank you.
[Drinks six-pack, crushes cans against his flat, sexy stomach, and belches]
|
An "ignore" function would be great. The "homosexuality in Golarion" thread is evidence enough of that.
I don't really understand the need for an ignore function....I tend to police my own thoughts and actions. If someone bothers me online I just don't read their posts. If they start being rude or harassing then I flag them. An ignore function would just lead to people having to paraphrase want an ignored person posted to the ignoring person so he could understand that "that rule/point/idea was already mentioned". Just seems a bit adolescent to need to have an ignore feature instead of just being civil and policing our own minds.
I think that an ignore function would be counter-productive to any real conversations that we could participate in, because that dissenting voice can change your viewpoint sometimes...if you're open to criticism. I personally have been proven wrong in my viewpoint before, and have changed my ways (kicking and screaming sometimes), but that's because I make an effort to change.
That said, there ARE people on these boards that purposely poison and burn conversations until the threads are nothing but an ash-dusted mockery of themselves, and I know that that can drive even the most patient of us away (myself included).
In those cases, we shouldn't need an ignore function - what we need is a heavier hand administering justice against these people. I think that truly problematic users should fear the banhammer, because there should be consequences to their actions.
Continuing to warn a user who continues to step well over the line over and over is akin to raising a toddler who doesn't fear your hollow threats. You can threaten someone all you want, but until real punishment is dropped, they will continue to push your buttons.
I really like these boards. I really like the people here. I really respect the Paizo employees who go out of their way to keep the "streets clean" for us, but I don't want the board to become complete anarchy where any person can walk into a conversation and corrupt it just for their own amusement.
Sometimes, deleting posts and locking threads aren't enough.
|
An "ignore" function would be great. The "homosexuality in Golarion" thread is evidence enough of that.I don't really understand the need for an ignore function....I tend to police my own thoughts and actions. If someone bothers me online I just don't read their posts. If they start being rude or harassing then I flag them. An ignore function would just lead to people having to paraphrase want an ignored person posted to the ignoring person so he could understand that "that rule/point/idea was already mentioned". Just seems a bit adolescent to need to have an ignore feature instead of just being civil and policing our own minds.
I understand the thought. But I stand by what I said. I think the folks on the previous page have done an excellent job answering this sort of concern, and again I refer you to the "Homosexuality in Golarion" thread. Even after heavy (and much needed) moderation (thanks, moderators!) it reads pretty nasty. The last few weeks would've been a lot nicer, I think, with an ignore function.
Also, in a post advocating "just being civil" as a solution, you might want to think twice before belittling an opinion you disagree with as "just a bit adolescent." Just sayin'! :-)
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
An "ignore" function would be great. The "homosexuality in Golarion" thread is evidence enough of that.I don't really understand the need for an ignore function....I tend to police my own thoughts and actions. If someone bothers me online I just don't read their posts. If they start being rude or harassing then I flag them. An ignore function would just lead to people having to paraphrase want an ignored person posted to the ignoring person so he could understand that "that rule/point/idea was already mentioned". Just seems a bit adolescent to need to have an ignore feature instead of just being civil and policing our own minds.
You're good at handling it. Good for you! (Seriously, it's good you don't take a lot of things close to home.) But because you don't need it, what about the others who feel they do? Would it negatively affect you if the feature was implemented? Bearing in mind discussions would likely continue much as they would before? If it would negatively affect you, how would it do so?
I think that an ignore function would be counter-productive to any real conversations that we could participate in, because that dissenting voice can change your viewpoint sometimes...if you're open to criticism. I personally have been proven wrong in my viewpoint before, and have changed my ways (kicking a screaming sometimes), but that's because I make an effort to change.
First, people who are not open to others' opinions will continue to remain so, whether there is an ignore feature or not. Many people, gamers especially in my personal experience, come to the Internet to be "right." No level of message board features is likely to alter that attitude.
Secondly, AGAIN, the point for me at least is not to avoid dissenting opinions. The point is to avoid people who refuse to let other people express their opinions without being attacked or who threadspam in order to silence others.
To me, an ignore function makes it easier to find good, alternative opinions and points of view because the people trying to shut them down can be made, effectively, to go away. Maybe it seems contradictory, but I have no moral quandary about silencing those who would silence others.
I have been at other boards where there are ignore functions. Their existence did not eliminate the presence of interesting discussions with multiple points of view.
That said, there ARE people on these boards that purposely poison and burn conversations until the threads are nothing but an ash-dusted mockery of themselves, and I know that that can drive even the most patient of us away (myself included).In those cases, we shouldn't need an ignore function - what we need is a heavier hand administering justice against these people. I think that truly problematic users should fear the banhammer, because there should be consequences to their actions.
Continuing to warn a user who continues to step well over the line over and over is akin to raising a toddler who doesn't fear your hollow threats. You can threaten someone all you want, but until real punishment is dropped, they will continue to push your buttons.
I really like these boards. I really like the people here. I really respect the Paizo employees who go out of their way to keep the "streets clean" for us, but I don't want the board to become complete anarchy where any person can walk into a conversation and corrupt it just for their own amusement.
Sometimes, deleting posts and locking threads aren't enough.
Somehow, even if Paizo says they'll never implement an ignore feature, I still think it's more likely to happen than them stepping up the strictness of their moderation.
The other issue is, while perhaps the Paizo boards would benefit from stricter moderation, it requires a lot more work on the part of the Paizo staff to enforce. All moderation is done by Paizo staff who have other responsibilities. Paizo is not interested in hiring people whose only responsibility is board moderation, nor in taking volunteer mods. So expecting them to step up their game in terms of deleting, locking, and banning means asking people with other job responsibilities (which involve making the games we love to play) to get further involved with these boards and less involved with their other responsibilities (or working overtime, which probably a number of them do anyway).
Once the work of an ignore script was implemented, it would not add further to any staff member's work load, save for basic maintenance, and it would probably by its nature reduce existing need for moderation, thus in fact freeing up more time for everyone.
I would love to see Paizo take a stronger stance on banning problem people (last person that I think got banned (and I'm not even 100% sure he was) REALLY had to throw a massive tantrum and attack people by name before they finally got rid of him; his myriad frequent personal attacks and sexist and homophobic remarks, often slightly subtler and below the belt, were repeatedly put up with before that point, inexplicably). But that also adds more work and contributes to a sense of "oppression" of the boards, where I think an ignore feature would be far more innocuous.
Pretty much everything DQ said, 100%.
Congratulations if you're one of the people who can ignore these things on your own. Not all of us possess that particular blessing.
The other issue is, while perhaps the Paizo boards would benefit from stricter moderation, it requires a lot more work on the part of the Paizo staff to enforce. All moderation is done by Paizo staff who have other responsibilities. Paizo is not interested in hiring people whose only responsibility is board moderation, nor in taking volunteer mods. So expecting them to step up their game in terms of deleting, locking, and banning means asking people with other job responsibilities (which involve making the games we love to play) to get further involved with these boards and less involved with their other responsibilities (or working overtime, which probably a number of them do anyway).
Oh, I know that the moderation done here is a "volunteer" project among the staff, and asking for a heavier hand is asking for a lot - that's why I try to thank them for doing what they do whenever I can.
However, I'm still hesitant to believe that an ignore feature would help in the long run, when some users need to be removed from the forums entirely.
Maybe I should give the script a shot before saying that though...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I knew that people would still be reporting the main personI got the script for, so I didn't feel bad in the least.
I would've hoped they were banned faster, and they may have been if I was reporting them more often, but after many, many of the highest post count threads on hot-button issues being started by this person, as well as undoubtedly one of the highest 'thread-locked' rates, I figured he was going to be sticking around for a while.
So I may as well try to remove the petulant child who is continously screaming while I'm trying to enjoy my dinner of pickled goblin ears. It was like being stuck on an airplane for 2 years, with a kid crying behind you the whole time. Noise Cancellation headphones that could be tuned to a specific person? Heck yes I'll use them, even though that means I'll be complaining to the airline attendant less often.
I always kind of wonder if the people who dislike the idea of an ignore feature are the ones who are afraid they are going to be ignored.
Not too happy about this ad hominem, Quakes. As if anybody can ignore me. Kobold voices operate on a higher frequency unreachable by your puny human Ignore lists!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think that an ignore function would be counter-productive to any real conversations that we could participate in, because that dissenting voice can change your viewpoint sometimes...if you're open to criticism. I personally have been proven wrong in my viewpoint before, and have changed my ways (kicking and screaming sometimes), but that's because I make an effort to change.
I disagree. I am very open to debating other viewpoints, but the few people I have on ignore via the script are either perenially rude to the point of willful disruption or they serially threadcrap to get posts deleted. I get nothing but anger from seeing them do that and I am quite happy to have discussions with people who might disagree with my personal preferences, but who do not maliciously try to be disruptive.
You're good at handling it. Good for you! (Seriously, it's good you don't take a lot of things close to home.) But because you don't need it, what about the others who feel they do? Would it negatively affect you if the feature was implemented? Bearing in mind discussions would likely continue much as they would before? If it would negatively affect you, how would it do so?
I don't really care one way or the other, however I think it would have an effect on those opposed to the ignore function.
Im a fan of the "flag it and move on" policy paizo have tried to advocate. Presumably a significant proportion of the flagging that happens is from people who would rather have that poster on ignore. Implementing this would presumably result in less flagging and therefore a lower quality or more unpleasant tone to the unfiltered board.
The ignore script was all but necessary for me to enjoy this site for a long time.
Then they banned shal-- eh, nevermind.
They did?
Seems they did. Either that or I misspelled the name because I can't find any relevant posts.
The ignore script was all but necessary for me to enjoy this site for a long time.
Then they banned shal-- eh, nevermind.
They did?
Seems they did. Either that or I misspelled the name because I can't find any relevant posts.
** spoiler omitted **
Anybody see a little naked goblin run through here?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Anybody see a little naked goblin run through here?
You mean that sexy, muscular goblin throwing communist leaflets when he passed this place?
Nope. Never seen him in my life.
The goblin is coming! Run away!!! Don't ignore him or he will get a Sneak Attack on you!
*zzzzz* Goblin? *zzz* Snack attack? Yes, I could use a snack or two...
The ignore script was all but necessary for me to enjoy this site for a long time.
Then they banned shal-- eh, nevermind.
They did?
Seems they did. Either that or I misspelled the name because I can't find any relevant posts.
** spoiler omitted **
Started a lot of hot button flame bait threads, many posts removed, many threads locked, pissed off at least one of the mods, yada ya. And that's just stating objective things.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Keep in mind that the mods won't comment on if someone is banned or not. But extremely argumentative people don't stop posting mid argument.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't post much, but I read the messageboards often. I can leave without the "Ignore" button, but I can understand that for some people are a necessity. There are far, far worse sites on internet, but here things can go pretty nasty.
Just want to say that without people like Orthos or DeathQuaker, that would be a worse site. That seems close to reward trolls and "flame-warriors".
One thing that irritates me about ignore functions is when people feel the need to repeatedly inform the world who they've ignored and/or to suggest that others follow suit.
It feels a bit passive-aggressive to me (or holier than thou or...something).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To be honest "irritate" was a little strong. :p
I do think the flagging system is underutilised though. In my experience, if you flag a post it's generally dealt with within a few hours (I'm guessing insomnia is something worth putting on your resume if you're going for a job at Paizo).
I used to 'bite back' at those posts which really bothered me and half the time the resultant back-and-forth upset me even more. Now that I've got used to flagging it and moving on I find the urge is gradually dying down. I still feel like I've done something in response to the offending post, but I dont get as emotionally involved. (Plus I take a secret moment of "Ha! I was right!" when the moderators remove the post in question).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd just like to add an emphatic "yes please" to this thread. It baffles me why an ignore feature isn't already in place.
I don't have any use for an ignore feature myself. Neither am I opposed to it. I do think it will make threads a bit harder to follow for those that use it. And, unless it extends to quotes, they are going to end up reading a bit of what they don't want anyway...
To be honest "irritate" was a little strong. :p
I do think the flagging system is underutilised though. In my experience, if you flag a post it's generally dealt with within a few hours (I'm guessing insomnia is something worth putting on your resume if you're going for a job at Paizo).
I used to 'bite back' at those posts which really bothered me and half the time the resultant back-and-forth upset me even more. Now that I've got used to flagging it and moving on I find the urge is gradually dying down. I still feel like I've done something in response to the offending post, but I dont get as emotionally involved. (Plus I take a secret moment of "Ha! I was right!" when the moderators remove the post in question).
I'd like to reiterate this. If you believe a post is inappropriate or offensive, or if you think the poster is trolling or not posting in good faith, don't respond to it. Flag it, and (assuming the post is in fact inappropriate) we'll deal with it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to reiterate this. If you believe a post is inappropriate or offensive, or if you think the poster is trolling or not posting in good faith, don't respond to it. Flag it, and (assuming the post is in fact inappropriate) we'll deal with it.To be honest "irritate" was a little strong. :p
I do think the flagging system is underutilised though. In my experience, if you flag a post it's generally dealt with within a few hours (I'm guessing insomnia is something worth putting on your resume if you're going for a job at Paizo).
I used to 'bite back' at those posts which really bothered me and half the time the resultant back-and-forth upset me even more. Now that I've got used to flagging it and moving on I find the urge is gradually dying down. I still feel like I've done something in response to the offending post, but I dont get as emotionally involved. (Plus I take a secret moment of "Ha! I was right!" when the moderators remove the post in question).
To be honest with you, Jessica, I don't use it as much as I probably should because:
1) I'm afraid of calling you over to too many posts that I may find offensive or wrong, but may not actually be breaking any rules
2) I think that there's a very vague line between an offensive post and a post that I simply disagree with
In both cases, I'd be worried about "abusing the system" and becoming annoying to you folks.
But, those are my own personal hang-ups on it. If neither of those things are a concern to you and the other devs, I'll put those worries aside and flag posts more often in the future.
I had similar concerns, Tirisfal. I was reassured somewhat when I asked for the ability to "unflag" a post (besides changing my mind, I also have stubby fingers and reasonably frequently flag something im trying to link to). Gary replied that it wasn't really a big deal for them to see the odd, flagged post that requires no action. (Certainly not a big enough deal to waste the coding time addressing it).
To be honest with you, Jessica, I don't use it as much as I probably should because:
1) I'm afraid of calling you over to too many posts that I may find offensive or wrong, but may not actually be breaking any rules
2) I think that there's a very vague line between an offensive post and a post that I simply disagree with
In both cases, I'd be worried about "abusing the system" and becoming annoying to you folks.
But, those are my own personal hang-ups on it. If neither of those things are a concern to you and the other devs, I'll put those worries aside and flag posts more often in the future.
I appreciate and admire both your consideration about flagging too many posts for us, and your ethical concerns. :-)
But flagging, in some ways, actually saves work in that if we're aware a flamewar or something is getting started, it's easier to head it off if we get notified early than if we come in later and have to delete 20 posts. And if we get a heads-up early enough that something's going south, sometimes we can cool things off without having to actually remove posts (e.g. "This thread is starting to become pretty heated -- please take a moment to review the messageboard rules").
Orthos, Gorbacz says he's sorry. He's done a lot of reflecting and has concluded you were completely right.He also said I am very handsome and smell like lilacs.
I was just as surprised as you.
...now I kind of want an ignore feature...so many possibilities...
I know Gorbacz, and I just rolled a 20 on Sense Motive.
You can't fool me, Ciretose. Also, you really smell of elderberries.
Jokes aside, I support an ignore function if enough many people want one.
You know after reading a certain thread....I think this message board really need a ignore feature. It was just one poster(though I kinda of got annoyed at the people responding to him/her)...either that or maybe Pazio needs to break out the ban hammer...a little more so.
Related to this...is there a way to block a specfic board member sending you PMs. I know you can shut of the function...I just want to stop one person say...more of a curiousity than anything else...I swear.
One thing that irritates me about ignore functions is when people feel the need to repeatedly inform the world who they've ignored and/or to suggest that others follow suit.
It feels a bit passive-aggressive to me (or holier than thou or...something).
At one of the boards that I went to that had an ignore feature it was against the rules to advertise your ignore list, and was considered a warnable offense that done too often, or in combination with inappropriate behavior, could lead to banning. Basically it falls under the "personal insult" no-no that is present at most boards.
John Kretzer: When someone sends you a PM, at the bottom right hand corner of the message you should see a link that says "block this sender." (Fortunately a feature I've not yet had to use, but I know it's there.)
I like to consider myself the forward observer calling for fire on a target. :)
Hold this bliping radio beacon and run toward that groups of enemies. Your sacrifice will be appreciated...
Next!
But flagging, in some ways, actually saves work in that if we're aware a flamewar or something is getting started, it's easier to head it off if we get notified early than if we come in later and have to delete 20 posts. And if we get a heads-up early enough that something's going south, sometimes we can cool things off without having to actually remove posts (e.g. "This thread is starting to become pretty heated -- please take a moment to review the messageboard rules").
That's great, but it doesn't change the fact that not being able to see the posts of people who routinely irritate me without actually breaking posting guidelines prevents me from wanting to start a flamewar in the first place.
This means less work for you guys.
Anybody see a little naked goblin run through here?You mean that sexy, muscular goblin throwing communist leaflets when he passed this place?
Nope. Never seen him in my life.
That's right. Sexy.