# Ignore?



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## Morrus

Pretty sure it works differently on this software.


----------



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## Umbran

I haven't had time to set up a test user and actually walk through what happens. 

However, the documentation I have found says that "Ignore" controls what _you_ see. Not what they see. So, if you ignore someone, you won't see their posts. They can still see your posts. You will, unfortunatley, be able to see when they like your content. And, in a page that's got stuff you have ignroed, there's a link to show it to you. So, some self-discipline to not go looking for trouble is required.

I suspect some folks would like to have a full "block" feature, which would also keep the blocked person from seeing your stuff.  My reading so far is that XenForo does not supply this natively.  It would likely require Morrus to install a plug-in, which may not come quickly.


----------



## Morrus

lowkey13 said:


> That's .... cryptic.
> 
> Want to share with the class?




I don’t know want more than you do yet! We’re all new to this!


----------



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## Umbran

I can certainly see how two-way blocks were useful to some.  And maybe at some future time, Morrus will implement a block.

We have gained another feature or two that may help keep arguments down.  We'll have to have some discussion on how we will want to use them most effectively.


----------



## Sacrosanct

I just wish people you ignored couldn't send you IMs.  Which they were able to on the old system.  There are plenty of reasons to ignore someone (they aren't just people you find irritating), so getting IMs from them after you've ignored them feels almost like harassment, especially since they know you ignored them.


----------



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## Sacrosanct

lowkey13 said:


> Eh, I don't have an issue with this for the most part. If someone wants to reach out to me privately, that can often lead to a resolution of any issue that might have arisen.
> 
> OTOH, if someone is harassing you in IMs, that's when you notify a moderator.




That's just it though.  There doesn't have to be an issue to resolve.  As I mentioned, there are many reasons why you can put someone on your ignore list that have nothing to do with conflict.   Therefore, there is nothing really to resolve.


----------



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## CapnZapp

I'm fine with whatever ignore functionality you come up with, including a full two-way block function, _as long as it doesn't block entire threads_.


----------



## Umbran

Yeah - the reason we have living, breathing people as moderators is that no _system_ will to exactly what's desired in all cases.  

If someone is sending you PMs, and you do not want them, reply to them to politely tell them you'd rather not hear form them... AND ADD A MODERATOR TO THE RECIPIENTS LIST.


----------



## robus

I was certainly able to get a block lifted by contacting the person who blocked me (a long time after the block) and asking nicely for a second chance 

The block was messing up my ability to make the "Best of" post.


----------



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## Umbran

Oh, these are moderator functions, not board-member-facing.


----------



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## Sacrosanct

They can also PM you, as I found out.

But it is nice to see threads if the creator is on your block list.


----------



## CapnZapp

Yes, everything about the old two-way ignore feature was understandable, except how entire threads became inaccessible just because you ignored/were ignored by the user making post #1. To me, that always came across as more of a database programming error than something logical and useful.

Please don't re-implement a solution that singles out the first post to be more special than the second, or 99th. 

(Not seeing the individual post, however, is fair)

Thx


----------



## Morrus

We're not 'implementing a solution' to anything. Xenforo's ignore function is Xenforo's ignore function. I have no plans to meddle with it.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Is it possible to make it so that we can choose to see what user is behind the “this content is from a user on your ignore list” wall? 

Or even just...not undo the ignore for the entire thread? 

Like, the new system makes temp-ignore pretty weird.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Also tbh not having a full block option is...bad.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> Is it possible to make it so that we can choose to see what user is behind the “this content is from a user on your ignore list” wall?
> 
> Or even just...not undo the ignore for the entire thread?
> 
> Like, the new system makes temp-ignore pretty weird.



No, that’s not how Xenforo’s software works. The way you see it is it.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> No, that’s not how Xenforo’s software works. The way you see it is it.



Man that’s...a real bummer. 

Not your fault the platform doesn’t have options for this sort of thing, but it still sucks that they just have a single solution with no variation in settings or implementation.


----------



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## doctorbadwolf

lowkey13 said:


> From what I understand, there is a plug-in from WMTech that has the same functionality that we used to have. It's an extension to the deafult ignore feature and doesn't cause and additional system load issues.
> 
> I'm going back to mentioning this and bumping the thread because I am increasingly dissatisfied with the current implementation; either you end up reporting things to mods (who have better things to do with their time) which isn't very scalable, or you let it slide, and IME the "letting it slide" tends to, over time, gradually degrade the discourse on all sides.
> 
> If this is an option (WMTech User Blocking System) then I am willing to pay part or all of the license fee as my contribution.



Just here to say that I would also be willing to lend material support to this.


----------



## Umbran

Quick search suggests... that plugin is not currently maintained, and hasn't been updated in four years?


----------



## Morrus

Yes, I’ve seen it before. It’s for for an older version of Xenforo. No use to us. Plus, as Umbran says, the developer does not maintain or support it well.


----------



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## Morrus

lowkey13 said:


> So we are on XenForo 2.0? I'm scouring the developer forums now.



2.1.x.

Believe me, I’ve been there. You’re not doing anything I haven’t done!


----------



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## Morrus

There's also the matter of if the developer is slow to update his mods to the current software iteration, you can't rely on him to do it in a time manner for future iterations -- leading to a broken site (a repeating problem which our old site was plagued by, and why I keep this code base fairly clean). Xenforo 2 has been out for quite a while now!


----------



## Umbran

*Mod Note:*
No, nobody is in trouble.  The color is so that people who are catching up on this take note of it.

The current ignore feature pretty obviously isn't working for everyone.  So, I will be trying a bit of an experiment.  Within a given thread, if you have been playing by the rules (so, not being rude or aggressive, or otherwise acting to create problems) and you politely ask someone to leave you alone, within that thread, I'll see if I can support that non-contact request.

We expect you to quietly use the Ignore feature first, and ask for this only when that's insufficient.  We _CANNOT_ enforce such things broadly - it can hold only within a particular thread.  Nor can we do so for extended periods of time.  And if you find yourself asking for non-contact frequently, we are going to have a discussion about whether you are creating your own issues, and how to manage that.  And I cannot promise very fast response time - I typically get to issues within a day, but I make no promises.

And, if you ask for non-contact, and it is found that you have actively been creating the issue, I am apt to boot you from the thread in question - you do not get to annoy people, and then use the moderator to shield you from your poor choices.

I do not know how well this will function, but it is worth trying, as a bit of a last resort between parties.  Use it wisely.


----------



## LordEntrails

I like the way Ignore works now. I really found the old method unfriendly and actually it was ... aggressive. Because of the way it screwed up links, you could use it to 'punish' a person you were annoyed with. IMO, if someone is tempted by seeing that someone they ignored has posted in a thread, well be mature and self-disciplined enough not to open their response. And the fact that you could not see a thread started by someone ignored, it was exclusionary and imo contrary to posting on a public forum.


----------



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## CapnZapp

The way post counts and links were misaligned by the ignore system on the old forum was AFAIK unintentional behavior (=a bug) and there is no reason to believe a well-coded new addon will repeat that behavior. This is after all a brand new forum software. I see no reason to oppose it and I fully empathize with people wanting stalkers off their backs. Just please make sure the block system doesn't make posts by people that _haven't_ put you on their ignore list or been ignored by you inaccessible (such as by disabling an entire thread just because the first post was written by somebody blocked by/blocking you). Regards


----------



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## LordEntrails

I dont see those two polarities at all. Of course 1 is true. And if 2 happens then that is what moderators are for. Limiting expression and accessibility if someone wants it is, imo, not worth the additional moderation efforts required.

I see the new behavior putting more capability into the users hands. I can choose to mark them as someone toxic to myself (ie ignore them) but then on  a case by case basis choose to read what they post. Things are clear that I have ignored them, but from context of other posts it might appear tha th they have something valuable to add and then I can take a look and see.

IMO, one of the challenges our connected world faces is our willingness to not even be aware what those who voice an opinion different than our have to say. Or even th hat they exist. The old ignore system simple removes that voice from our world, and the fact that their might be a dissenting opinion becomes kept from us.

I never want to be ignorant that a dissenting opinion exists, even if I choose not to inform myself what that opinion is. And, the two way block allows someone else to remove my choice to know they even exist. I dont see any good coming from a system with the implications of the other system.


----------



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## LordEntrails

lowkey13 said:


> Look, your point is your point, and you are welcome to it. Unfortunately, it rarely works that way on the internet, and when you say something like "I never want to be ignorant that a dissenting opinion exists," what I hear is someone saying, "You have no right to be left alone from me, and I will chase you down to the ends of the earth because I think my opinion is so right it needs to be heard, and I don't understand how this harassment affects other people and makes life and conversation intolerable." If you need to be heard, go to twitter.




You obviously have a well informed opinion and have thought this out. But I do not think you are actually hearing what I'm saying. You think you know my view or side of things and you then assume you know how you feel. But I'm not saying what you say I'm saying.

First, it can work. Just because it doesn't always work does not means we should advocate for oppression. Think of all the parallels one could draw to sexism, racism and other forms of discrimination. It all starts and is fostered somewhere.

"... chase you down..." statement is a while lot of fun hyperbole, but no where near any reality of what I said or intend. And by jumping to such a conclusion is what makes me think you are not hearing me.

No where did I suggest harrassment be tolerated. Instead I said automated systems that are overly negative are not worth, imo, the reduced workload required of moderators. Someone intent on harrassment can do so regardless of what automated system is in place, hence the need for moderators.

Of course, only Morrus and the mods can determine if their workload is worth the restrictions (as they see them) such a system might entail. I also suggest that if it ain't really broken, then dont "fix" it. Even the little issue I'm aware of regarding you and ignore in another thread is not worth such. It was easily solved.

[/quote]Put another way- this is a fun place where, for the most part, we are discussing elves and dragons and unicorns. IMO, no one's opinion is so important that it overrides my right to be left the heck alone. And I don't think it's fair to the few moderators we have, either. But that's my opinion.
[/QUOTE]
I'm not suggesting your right to be left alone be jeopardized. But your right to be left alone runs up against everyone else's right to be informed and aware when you decide to engage in the community, and to then read a post that has been marked as written by an ignored user. 

Someone you have ignored still has a right to respond to public comments you make. It is your choice if you choses to read them.


----------



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## Sacrosanct

Speaking in generalities here.  If you (general you) don't want someone to continue to reply to you, you'd probably have better luck if you didn't attack their character in your request.  Just say'n.  I imagine you'd have better luck with:

"I've put you on ignore, please don't continue to quote me"

than

"I thought you were more moral than you are, don't reply back."


I have to admit, it seems odd to me that if the person you attacked replies back, you're the one who says you're harassed.


----------



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## Sacrosanct

I'm not following anyone from thread to thread (or perhaps anyone can show these thread where I've done that).  I'm speaking in general terms about the topic of this thread (of which I had posted to weeks ago), and has multiple participants.

Or are we now at a point where I can't participate in any discussion where someone who has me on ignore has also partaken in?  I would think if someone has me on ignore, then they can't see my posts unless they actively decide to unmask them.  And if someone does that every time, why would I be on ignore in the first place?  But the latter is really not the main question.  My main question is the former.  Are we prohibited from partaking in a discussion if one of the participants has you on ignore?


----------



## Morrus

What the hell happened to this thread? That’s very... disappointing. It’s just a thread about a frigging board function. This conversation is over.   Jeez.


----------



## Morrus

(@Umbran the thread's locked - he can't reply!)


----------



## Umbran

Noted that myself just after the post, and deleted.


----------

