Ignore feature now expanded to posts.

[Labrocca]

I have just finished the code modification to make the ignore list also work with posts. You will see a message from ignored members with a link to your user control panel to remove the member if you wish. I may alter the ignore feature at a later date but it does work as it is now.

To access your ignore list go to usercp then Buddy/Ignore list and add usernames of people you don't wish to read messages from.

Recently there has been some heated threads...I can't even call it debate. It's just people pissing each other off. I thought ignore worked for posts but I was wrong so I altered it to suit our needs.

Enjoy.

[lily]

Thanks Labrocca!

[Labrocca]

FYI- Moderators and Staff won't be adding members to their ignore list. We will still be watching all the usual suspects. :)

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Aww, let them add me. What if I say please?

It also seems fair that if someone puts someone else on their ignore list, any rep they have given to that person should be zeroed

[Labrocca]

Moderators have a seperate ignore list...it's called the "ban list". :)

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Cool! I guess I'm soon to be ignored then, for whatever reason they can think of.

[ECW]

Thanks Labrocca!


Agreed.

[Labrocca]

Please let me know if there is any odd behavior with the new feature or if you have a suggestion for it.

[AlonzoMourning23]

Can it be made so that you can ignore people, but, where it shows the ignored persons post (that they made a post, not the post itself), can it be done so that you can choose just to view that post, without un ignoring them? I know on previous boards I'd sometimes want to read an ignored persons post, but just one of their posts, and I never understood why I just couldn't double click it so it would show me their post, instead of having to go and unignore them.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Polls seem to be all ignored, or did you fix that already.

Also I think if you ignore someone you shouldn't be able to give them feedback. On a similar point I don't think Mods should be allowed feedback, it gives an impression of bias.

[ECW]

On the other hand, if you have a poll and it gives an impression of bias, I think the Mods should ignore the feedback if they have a similar point. But if your feedback gets fixed and you already have bias I don't think your similar point should be allowed to be a poll. Polls need to be fixed and ignored unless you have a similar point. I seem to think there are Mods and then there are polls and it gives an impression of bias if you ignore a similar point, any individual poster or racial or ethnic group if it is appropriate and allowed to be derogatory.

OK?

[Labrocca]

Dammit...fixing the poll problem now.

[ECW]

On the other hand, if you have a poll and it gives an impression of bias, I think the Mods should ignore the feedback if they have a similar point. But if your feedback gets fixed and you already have bias I don't think your similar point should be allowed to be a poll. Polls need to be fixed and ignored unless you have a similar point. I seem to think there are Mods and then there are polls and it gives an impression of bias if you ignore a similar point, any individual poster or racial or ethnic group if it is appropriate and allowed to be derogatory.

OK?


It's a joke, son, it's a joke.

[Stoner]

We will still be watching all the usual suspects

Dude, I wonder if I'm on that watch list http://www.freesmileys.org/emo/ad/thatsit.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org)

[Labrocca]

OK..I just spent another 2 hours just to simply get signatures to show instead of a second ignore message. I wanted to get rid of the signature for ignored members altogether but for some reason I can't get it to work the other way. It's really weird. Anyways...it's better like this than the 2 messages. Anyone on your ignore you will still see their sig. I might work on it tomorrow to reverse that if I can.

[Nitrus]

Thanks.

Although I am worried that this could just turn into an "ignore fest" if you will.

[lily]

If that does happen, Nitrus then the ignore feature will be a success. Nobody is going to put anyone on ignore that they respect and want to reply to.

[ECW]

Thanks.

Although I am worried that this could just turn into an "ignore fest" if you will.


I haven't put you on Ignore, Nitrus. I stand ready and at the watch anytime you want to put your debating talents on display.

ECW

[Nitrus]

Great, so now your waiting for an excuse to ignore me.. lol.

[lily]

Nah, Nitrus.........I think he means you don't post enough......now post dammmmmitttt.;)

[Labrocca]

Ingore feature updated so Senior Staff and Myself (admin) cannot be ignored.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Ingore feature updated so Senior Staff and Myself (admin) cannot be ignored.


Honestly I don't like that.

[Labrocca]

Yes but if a staff has to make comments in a thread as part of their moderator duties and actions then it's important everyone see the message. I know perfectly well that you would ignore Lily and Zo but that's not acceptable when they have to be moderators here.

And you shouldn't be able to ignore their PMs either. I have to contact mybb about that bug.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

They can have two logins, one for posting, one for moderation. That way I can ignore their posts and they can still post un ignorable moderator messages.

Seems fair to me. Why should I have to view their liberal balderdash just because they are mods??

[Labrocca]

And why should they have 2 logins? How about YOU have 2 logins? One for the nice guy I know you can be and the other for the monkey you pretend to be. Or do I have it backwards?

Honestly...give it a rest man. Not everything is about YOU or some liberal bias. We are trying to run a debate forums not win an election.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Even with two logins I will forced to read lily and alonzo's non moderation posts, which is the vast majority of their posts.

What I am talking about is running a debate form that gives everyone the same treatment regardless of politics. Your moderators post FAR FAR more liberal posts than conservative ones, conservatives who use the ignore feature to filter certain liberal posters shouldn't be deprived full use of that feature.

As always, this is simply my opinion. I can understand that you might not agree, but I do take exception to being asked not to give my opinion just because your liberal mods are involved.

The fact is that since you put in an ignore function, I should be able to use it for more than just ECW, he's not the only liberal who's posts I want to ignore.

[Labrocca]

Well I will take it into consideration and discuss it with staff.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

It would also be nice if ignore removed signatures of ignored posters, maybe even avatars as well.

[Labrocca]

I tried to get ignore to remove signatures and failed miserably.Â*Â*What was happening is that the ignore message was repeated twice which isn't the effect I desire.

http://www.democracyforums.com/usercp.php?action=options

You can edit on that page under "view thread options" to disable sigatures or avatars from posts. It's not on a per user basis since that would only add load to the site.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

I know I can disable sigs globally, I have already done that some time ago, it's just a shame that I can't see anyones sig because of a single annoying one.

[Labrocca]

There are browser features which often allow you to not show certain images. What browser do you use?

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

firefox

What I hope for is a rule that prevents annoying or disturbing images in signatures, especially those that ad nothing to civil debate.

[Labrocca]

I must have a button on my forhead that you just love to push ehh FBM.

btw...your new sig is making me hungry.Â*Â*I am gonna go buy some lamb tomorrow and slow cook it on my smoker.

Try that.
https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/1672/

btw that add-on just tries to act like Opera...which is what I use and it's incredibly easy to block ANY content with it. Opera kicks butt. I tested that Firefox plugin and it's suitable. You just set a filter to block any image you want. Works well enough.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

The sig was only as an illustration, I have one I took myself of a butchered dog I took in Anshan China, maybe I'll host it on a image site and use it.

It's not about pushing a button on your forehead, it's about working within the boundaries you set. It does no good sometimes to try and make a point logically, like with alonzo giving me 4 warning points for a making a personal attack in a comment about a group when lily said such things are not personal attacks. Of course lily's comment was when a liberal poster was doing it.

It's that sliding scale that makes these discussions much harder than they have to be.

I would vote for no images in sigs. Who here is using an image in a sig? Do you see anyone who has an image that adds to "civil debate"?

[ECW]

Is the private message feature down?

[Labrocca]

Did you try to PM me ECW?Â*Â*If so I had you on my ignore list as a test subject.

Also I guess images in sigs aren't really necessary on a site like this. I will also take that into consideration. I can modify the code so sigs will disallow img tag if needed.

[bobbylien]

I know a certain someone whos earned himself an ignore.

[ECW]

Did you try to PM me ECW?Â*Â*If so I had you on my ignore list as a test subject.

Yes, I did, just to answer back your PM to me.

Also I guess images in sigs aren't really necessary on a site like this.Â*Â*I will also take that into consideration.Â*Â*I can modify the code so sigs will disallow img tag if needed.

Is there a problem with the images? I haven't seen one yet. Are we fixing something that is not a problem?

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Ignored users post are now visible in the post review when you do a reply, they didn't used to be. Than that be fixed?

[slappy]

Incidentally, on the issue of images in sigs, I've just discovered a neat little add-on for Firefox called My Image Here (https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/3811/). This allows you to right-click on any image on any website (so long as it's a simple image and not part of some java environment or what have you) and replace it with the image of your choice, stored on your own hard drive.

I tried it out with one of the sig images on this site and it works fine. It immediately replaces the particular sig image you've clicked on, and it will replace all other instances of the same picture once you've shut down Firefox and opened it up again. (There may be a way to do the latter without restarting Firefox, but I haven't figured that out so far.)

I was glad to discover this simply because I find some sig images on some forums I visit to be way too large for my taste. However, if you're easily amused, I suppose you could have loads of fun changing every poster's sig pic (or avatar!) to whatever image you wish. :)

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Still think the mods should be ignored like everyone else, they post a lot of crap that I don't want to be subjected to, just like the other libs here.

[NortheastCynic]

If you could ignore the Mods, what would the purpose of the Mods be?

-NC

[ECW]

If you could ignore the Mods, what would the purpose of the Mods be?

-NC


To recommend that the owner ban you. That's all.

[NortheastCynic]

I was responding to a post made by FleaBitMonkey who said the mods post "crap" and they should be "ignored".

-NC

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

If you could ignore the Mods, what would the purpose of the Mods be?

-NC


What's their purpose now? They moderate with a lot of bias, worse than no moderation at all.

And they could easily have two logins, a mod one that can't be ignored, and a personal one for posting their opinion that can be ignored. That would be fair to the users of the ignore system.

[Labrocca]

I might allow mods to be ignored. I am discussing it with them now. Mods will still be able to edit posts to add moderator messages and to give warnings. If a member has a moderator on their ignore list and the moderator posts of warnings to be civil are ignored it will just result in that member getting some extra points.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

If a member has a moderator on their ignore list and the moderator posts of warnings to be civil are ignored it will just result in that member getting some extra points.


Then there needs to be a way to review the points before a ban results, because the biased mods will just use this to give undeserved points unchallenged, as is their want.

As you know, Labrocca, a substantial portion of the points I was given have been overturned, others should have been but you simply say "it's only a couple points".

Unless you have decided to give mods the OK to act in a personal manner instead of a professional one.

[lily]

http://ec2.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000E1VYR8.01._AA280_PIbundle-12,TopRight,0,0_AA280_SH20_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Awe...shame I can't see your post. I am sure it's infuriating or annoying. Luckly I don't see it.

la la la

Oops, thought I was labrocca for a moment :)

[ECW]

I was responding to a post made by FleaBitMonkey who said the mods post "crap" and they should be "ignored".

-NC


Thanks. I picked that up by inference. My response is the same. If one ignores the mods let it be at their own peril. A banning usually, but not always, brings a member back into line.

Seems like he is the only one having problems with the mods. I get dinged all the time for stuff I should know better about but I let my emotions run away with me. I think every mod has dinged me with Lily putting the hammer on me the most. I just pull back the reigns a bit and all is well. All the whining and the bitching about the mods is just getting him on more and more Ignore lists.

My humble suggestion is for him to start his own board wih his own mods then he can do it the way he wants. This is Labrocca's board and he is doing it the way he wants. I got no problem with it.

[Labrocca]

Oddly it's lily that FBM complains about most as well...saying she is biased and let's her liberal friends get away with everything. I know it's not true and obviously so do you ECW. He doesn't see the reports overall..I do. I see who, when and for what each report is for. I tried to reason with him but it was mostly him wanting to argue it out and saying how poor a moderator Lily is. Whatever...he is ignored now.

I realize there is no such thing as a perfect moderator but lily in my opinion tried very hard to be unbiased. We often discuss decisions and when she is wrong will admit it. You guys aren't privy to staff conversations but I will say that lots of moderator actions are discussed BEFORE they are taken and plenty after.

PAD actually threw a fit once in the staff area because he said we discussed stuff too much. lol...personally I like the staff as a whole and getting their input often sheds light on a topic.

My biggest gripe is him complaing, bitching, and moaning about the incredible injustice of a few warning points. What a joke. OMG...I got warning points I don't deserve..blah blah blah

Anyways....

[NortheastCynic]

ECW: Yeah I figured you figured that out, I wasn't trying to be condescending, just making sure that you didn't think I was suggesting that I wanted to ignore mods :).

-NC

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Oddly it's lily that FBM complains about most as well.


No it's not, except that she deliberately didn't give a liberal poster warning points he deserved (I have this on PM from her)

Alonzo is the one who publicly posted an accusation against me that simply wasn't true, who told Nitrus that I was a joke login in order to have a warning I didn't deserve given, and who gave me the latest warning that in no way broke the rules, even according to you, but you upheld it anyway because I was rude.

And Nitrus was just completely unmodlike in every aspect.

Lily is the best mod you have, but she is also biased.


My biggest gripe is him complaing, bitching, and moaning about the incredible injustice of a few warning points. What a joke. OMG...I got warning points I don't deserve..blah blah blah


If warning points are meaningless, then why do you give them? Clearly they have meaning to you and the staff, except when you give them when they aren't deserved and all of a sudden they are minor things that don't matter.

If your mods can't be consistent and unbiased with warning points, how can they be trusted at all?

Also, if you disagree, lets open it all up, the mod discussions, the actions, the PM's and see if I am wrong or not.

[lily]

I am stating right here very plainly what I told you in PM, Flea. You are not given my permission to post any of my PMs in public forum. Posters on this forum PM me for various reasons and I will NOT have their faith in my trust,Â*Â*that anything said in a PRIVATE MESSAGE will be made public. I will not lose the faith of any of the posters on this forum, so you can settle some grudge that you have made up in your head and blown out of proportion or to prove some useless point.

You make such a big deal out of some measly warning points that go away in days, yet beg posters to give you negative rep. points. What kind of sense does that make? You make a total mockery out of the moderators here and then expect them to deabte with you?

Either way, I've gone off topic of what I wanted to say. NO, as I told you before, you may NOT post my PM in this forum. This is non-negotiable.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Awe...shame I can't see your post. I am sure it's infuriating or annoying. Luckly I don't see it.

la la la



LOL, what he said!

[ECW]

ECW: Yeah I figured you figured that out, I wasn't trying to be condescending, just making sure that you didn't think I was suggesting that I wanted to ignore mods :).

-NC


No problem, NEC. I am sure that I know you better than that. Everything is cool between us.

[ECW]

My biggest gripe is him complaing, bitching, and moaning about the incredible injustice of a few warning points.Â*Â*What a joke.Â*Â*OMG...I got warning points I don't deserve..blah blah blah

Anyways....


What's incredible is how much time we have WASTED dealing with this non-issue. I may take a ding for this but so be it:

Flea: STFU and just post. Stop making it personal and stick to hammering the public figures we all love to bash. Everyone will be happier including yourself.

[Labrocca]

Exactly ECW...that's why I took the steps I did.