Ignore Feature?
- Thread starter ChrisRay
- Start date
If only such a thing couldn't be 'gamed'.digitalwanderer said:I'd like the ignore feature and I'd love it if it said how many people are ignoring you or if we could have a "Top 10 Ignored Posters" it would be even better.
Step 1: Create bogus account
Step 2: Ignore somebody you want to ridicule
Step 3: Repeat 100x
SHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!RussSchultz said:If only such a thing couldn't be 'gamed'.digitalwanderer said:I'd like the ignore feature and I'd love it if it said how many people are ignoring you or if we could have a "Top 10 Ignored Posters" it would be even better.
Step 1: Create bogus account
Step 2: Ignore somebody you want to ridicule
Step 3: Repeat 100x
Yeah, but then you'd just have to register a new account and make a couple hundred posts real quick and then vote to ignore whoever....repeat 100x. :?Natoma said:
Heck, I could do it in an afternoon....
/ignore
Sorry, I should have done:
/ignore
/ignore
silence said:can we have this feature...PLEASE?.....
(i guess some ppl would prolly use it on me, but hey....that the price i am ready to pay)
U're not important or annoying enough to be ignored... yet...
Why not just simply make a thread where everyone could list their top 5 persons they'd ignore if there were such a feature. Then, after every couple of pages they would be counted and listed.Killer-Kris said:
That'd be fun.
rabidrabbit said:
I THINK the "guys guys guys, look who we banned!" thread is enough for those public humiliation thirsty of us.
There's such a thread?
...yes there seems to be, it has only one name in it, "Scali".
And it only shows those who are banned, in other words, they are no longer posting on the forums.
The function of the list I suggested is to prevent banning.
Making fun of a banned person is not fun, it's almost like humiliating a dead person.
And banning is something the mods do, there's no democracy. It's basically a way for the mods to make their own list of most unpopular posters
Ok, if a public humiliation is too much, why don't all of us just send 5 PM's to their five most disliked posters. Then only the ones receiving the mails would know.
...yes there seems to be, it has only one name in it, "Scali".
And it only shows those who are banned, in other words, they are no longer posting on the forums.
The function of the list I suggested is to prevent banning.
Making fun of a banned person is not fun, it's almost like humiliating a dead person.
And banning is something the mods do, there's no democracy. It's basically a way for the mods to make their own list of most unpopular posters
Ok, if a public humiliation is too much, why don't all of us just send 5 PM's to their five most disliked posters. Then only the ones receiving the mails would know.
The reason banned persons are named in that thread is to save us the admins the time to explain why we ban folks -- read 90% of the way Scali posts. Better to have folks realize what's wrong for themselves instead of us giving "only the subjective opinions of B3D staff". We don't want to humiliate folks - we just don't want to waste unneccesary time doing the explaining (which we don't owe anyone, if you think about it).
That doesn't make sense... at all :?Reverend said:
It still doesn't explain why the person was banned... so how can it save the time to do that ? If anything, it raises more questions of "why he was banned". If Scali wasn't listed there, I'd never even known he was banned, thus I'd never asked myself "why Scali was banned?".
Well, it's like giving reasons why Deadmeat and Chap were banned. Many times. It's pretty much self explanatory...
A ban is self explanatory, that's why I don't understand why Reverend said putting the name on display "saves the admins time to explain why we ban folks".
As if the time saving was the reason putting the name there.
I'm confused.
As if the time saving was the reason putting the name there.
I'm confused.
rabidrabbit said:
Oh stop being so inquiring... It's FUN to see who's been banned!
Similar threads
