OT Split - One Year On

[NickyJ]

You can feel superior to one of those about 30 posters. I didn't have any ideas outside of reimplementing red diamonds.

 

[Borachio]

There has also been suggestions to implement the already used tools in a different way, from a revamped permanent points to ever-escalating bans.

Yes. The ever-escalating ban idea is interesting.

I'm not sure I'm convinced that banning is a good idea at all, though.

I still think that putting an irritating poster on ignore is all the weaponry a forum really needs.

But that doesn't work too well for me, since then I just start to burn with curiosity.

---------------

I couldn't think of anything new to suggest in the poll, either. I did try to be helpful.

 

[Oruc]

I've decided to copy over 1 of my replies to the OT survey here, because I think that it may draw some useful comment.

9. What do you feel is required to ensure Colosseum membership grows (or at least does not decline), and progressively becomes more enjoyable?

I said something similar, they would have to get rid of some of the circlejerk and that will make the place more welcoming. But they would have to break the rules to do that, which I said the shouldn't do.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

The ignore feature doesn't work for technical reasons as well as social (is that the correct term for posters behavior? Social? Idk) reasons that have not been addressed (on the technical side) and cannot be addressed (on the social).

We have covered why it doesn't work socially right here in this thread and no one has yet put forth a decent countergument.

On the technical side, the ignore feature doesn't work as it still shows posts from people on your list whenever they are quoted by someone else. Plus, it still shows that they posted, it just covers up what they said (until they are quoted). Having to wade through potentially dozens of covered up posts can bw annoying and can leave you feeling left out even if all that is in the blocked posts are spam in a can.

 

[Oruc]

The ignore feature doesn't work for technical reasons as well as social (is that the correct term for posters behavior? Social? Idk) reasons that have not been addressed (on the technical side) and cannot be addressed (on the social).

We have covered why it doesn't work socially right here in this thread and no one has yet put forth a decent countergument.

On the technical side, the ignore feature doesn't work as it still shows posts from people on your list whenever they are quoted by someone else. Plus, it still shows that they posted, it just covers up what they said (until they are quoted). Having to wade through potentially dozens of covered up posts can bw annoying and can leave you feeling left out even if all that is in the blocked posts are spam in a can.

If it's your own failure to control yourself why should another poster be punished?

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Should I repeat the answers myself and others have already provided to this question?

 

[Oruc]

Should I repeat the answers myself and others have already provided to this question?

Are they decent counterarguments?

 

[Borachio]

The ignore feature doesn't work for technical reasons as well as social (is that the correct term for posters behavior? Social? Idk) reasons that have not been addressed (on the technical side) and cannot be addressed (on the social).

We have covered why it doesn't work socially right here in this thread and no one has yet put forth a decent countergument.

On the technical side, the ignore feature doesn't work as it still shows posts from people on your list whenever they are quoted by someone else. Plus, it still shows that they posted, it just covers up what they said (until they are quoted). Having to wade through potentially dozens of covered up posts can bw annoying and can leave you feeling left out even if all that is in the blocked posts are spam in a can.

Yes. I can see the point of what you're saying.

And I understand the problem, I think.

Nevertheless, ignoring someone's comments (and I agree the ignore feature doesn't work too well) is the best option.

Then, you'll say, other people not ignoring them too produces a problem. To which the hard answer has to be "Well, that's kind of tough!"

(I think.)

 

[hobbsyoyo]

That is in the eye of the beholder Oruc.

@Borachio - the other side of it is that the ignore feature doesn't address the baiters who should be dealt with. I think it keeps coming back to this because not everyone actually reads what I post beyond what they think they can attack - but I have stated numerous times that it is not fair to the baitee or the rest of the community to leave baiters unadressed. It is unreasonable to ask everyone to ignore everyone who posts for no other reason than to bait because there are so many.

 

[Oruc]

That is in the eye of the beholder Oruc.

Correct that's why I find it funny you said no one had put forth a decent counterargument.

@Borachio - the other side of it is that the ignore feature doesn't address the baiters who should be dealt with. I think it keeps coming back to this because not everyone actually reads what I post beyond what they think they can attack - but I have stated numerous times that it is not fair to the baitee or the rest of the community to leave baiters unadressed. It is unreasonable to ask everyone to ignore everyone who posts for no other reason than to bait because there are so many.

It is fair, if you overreact you only have yourself to blame. If you cannot exercise self restraint that is entirely your fault.

 

[Borachio]

That is in the eye of the beholder Oruc.

@Borachio - the other side of it is that the ignore feature doesn't address the baiters who should be dealt with. I think it keeps coming back to this because not everyone actually reads what I post beyond what they think they can attack - but I have stated numerous times that it is not fair to the baitee or the rest of the community to leave baiters unadressed. It is unreasonable to ask everyone to ignore everyone who posts for no other reason than to bait because there are so many.

Ah well.

I don't have any good answers to it.

Baiters...baitees...I get confused which is which. I mean, I know a baiter is someone who baits a baitee. But in practice, who's who?

If I ask what I think is a genuine question I want an answer to, someone else could easily think I'm baiting. Or if I'm asking someone a question in response to something, I could be both. Depending on who you ask.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Correct that's why I find it funny you said no one had put forth a decent counterargument.

Trust me, I knew exactly where you were going with that, you aren't slipping anything by anyone.

It is fair, if you overreact you only have yourself to blame. If you cannot exercise self restraint that is entirely your fault.

I have this puppy that likes to follow me around the house. He's an adorable little thing and he will stay right by my side from one end of the house to the other, sometimes giving my heels a nip just to change things up. The thing is that he does that even though we aren't going anywhere. We are covering the exact same ground yet he insists on following me.

Of course, the reason why he does that is because he is a puppy who doesn't know any better. What's your excuse?

I understand that you feel very strongly about this topic and further that you hate both myself and my opinions on the matter. The problem is that you aren't actually reading what I post and you simply repeat the same things over and over and over again. Throw in a little
a trolling and some baiting on my visitor wall and it appears you've become nothing more than the useless to my GhostWriter16. Oh sure, I've swiped back and it's good fun by all accounts. Don't you get bored with repeating yourself? Or are you genuinely incapable of realizing you're doing it, just like you're incapable of seeing my points for what they really are instead of what you want them to be?

Don't worry, I will respond to your response to this when I get home in the evening since trying to give you the last word obviously didn't sate your compulsion.

Ah well.

I don't have any good answers to it.

Baiters...baitees...I get confused which is which. I mean, I know a baiter is someone who baits a baitee. But in practice, who's who?

In practice, I am a the baitee and Oruc is the baiter. You can see it right here in this thread over the last few pages. We're both at fault for this little charade and our previous infractions and warnings simply isn't strong enough to overcome our love.

 

[Oruc]

What's your excuse?

Your opinion on this matter is abhorrent and it should be confronted.

I understand that you feel very strongly about this topic and further that you hate both myself and my opinions on the matter. The problem is that you aren't actually reading what I post and you simply repeat the same things over and over and over again. Throw in a little
a trolling and some baiting on my visitor wall and it appears you've become nothing more than the useless to my GhostWriter16. Oh sure, I've swiped back and it's good fun by all accounts. Don't you get bored with repeating yourself? Or are you genuinely incapable of realizing you're doing it, just like you're incapable of seeing my points for what they really are instead of what you want them to be?

Have you read your own posts? you've been saying the same thing for a few pages "I can't help myself" and instead of trying to control yourself you just shrug your shoulders say it's impossible and demand the mods shut up another poster because you don't have enough will power to act like sensible person.
What's got me worried is the mods are actually going to cave in this, posters are going to be banned because they won't take part in the circlejerk.

In practice, I am a the baitee and Oruc is the baiter. You can see it right here in this thread over the last few pages. We're both at fault for this little charade and our previous infractions and warnings simply isn't strong enough to overcome our love.

If you continue to make arguments in this thread how am I the baiter by responding to them?

 

[Borachio]

If you continue to make arguments in this thread how am I the baiter by responding to them?

I honestly don't know the answer to this.

Looks to me like every poster is both baiter and baitee. Assuming they ever respond to anyone, that is.

 

[illram]

Moderator Action: Oruc and Hobbs, the irony is palpable. Stop please. This is supposed to be a constructive conversation.

Moderator Action: Same warning, this time with points. Next time it will be a short vacation. This thread should remain constructive.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

The ignore feature doesn't work for technical reasons as well as social (is that the correct term for posters behavior? Social? Idk) reasons that have not been addressed (on the technical side) and cannot be addressed (on the social).

We have covered why it doesn't work socially right here in this thread and no one has yet put forth a decent countergument.

I'm sorry but I have to disagree. It may not work for you, but it works fine for me.

You are expecting it to completely remove the existence of the ignoree so that it alleviate the choice you have. The ignore feature is not meant to do that.

On the technical side, the ignore feature doesn't work as it still shows posts from people on your list whenever they are quoted by someone else. Plus, it still shows that they posted, it just covers up what they said (until they are quoted). Having to wade through potentially dozens of covered up posts can be annoying and can leave you feeling left out even if all that is in the blocked posts are spam in a can.

You are right, but again the ignore feature was never meant to completely remove the existence of the posts.

If you feel left out, why ignore the person? If you, like me, are still curious what the post contains, you have the choice to view the post. But that choice is yours.

One adjustment that could be made (which would be unfortunately for me, since I still sometimes quote someone I have on ignore) is remove the quote button entirely. But really, I feel it would be unnecessary,

Like in the real life, you can ignore someone, but you'll still hear what you want to ignore. You just decide not to react on it.

The decision is yours. As I see it, the ignore feature works fine.

 

[choxorn]

I honestly don't know the answer to this.

Looks to me like every poster is both baiter and baitee. Assuming they ever respond to anyone, that is.

To paraphrase Arakhor, can't we agree that we are all master baiters, and probably also master baitees?

 

[Tarquelne]

I'm now trying the ignore feature. I'll report on how bloody annoying and frustrating it is. Or not.

Wow, already annoying: You see a little extra line or two telling you there's a deleted post, and then, right under that, you get to see some or all of the deleted post quoted. Almost always, so far.

Maybe I'll get used to it. As a reminder that all those people you see responding are wasting their time, it's OK.


But *now* I understand why people like JR: He doesn't use the quote function.

 

[LegionSteve]

I have never used the ignore function, I don't see the point.

Even if you did ignore the spammer, and all the baiters, and all the people quoting them, it still wouldn't bring back the interesting discussion that might have happened had the thread not been derailed.

 

[Mise]

Yeah I don't have any problems filtering out posts from people I don't care about. I understand that other people do, though, and it would be great to see a better solution.

Zelig, make a greasemonkey script pls thx. It actually shouldn't be too hard to do, should it?