| Steven H Smith | 10 Jun 2008 7:41 a.m. PST |
We need a reverse stifle button. It could be used when we do not want someone to view our pearls of wisdom. There are those whom I simply do not want to benefit from my wisdom. |
| xxxxxxxxooooo | 10 Jun 2008 7:50 a.m. PST |
|
| nycjadie | 10 Jun 2008 7:54 a.m. PST |
That's a little too "mean girls" meets "real genius" for my taste. |
| Malbrook | 10 Jun 2008 8:19 a.m. PST |
I thought you were suggesting a button to make sure you see everything a member posts. Call it the "stalk" button. |
| La Long Carabine | 10 Jun 2008 9:15 a.m. PST |
The "Ah don' wanna talk to you no more, you empty-headed animal food-trough wiper!" Button? No, I think we can talk past each other quite nicely without it. I think the stifle button is a silly idea as well. LLC aka Ron |
| La Long Carabine | 10 Jun 2008 9:16 a.m. PST |
I thought you were suggesting a button to make sure you see everything a member posts. Call it the "stalk" button. I think this is the search by author function. LLC aka Ron |
| John the OFM | 10 Jun 2008 9:18 a.m. PST |
It's probably unconstitutional.
Or fattening. |
| Lentulus | 10 Jun 2008 9:29 a.m. PST |
Looking at it purely as a system requirement, it is far too easy to defeat. The inverse-stiflee needs merely to log out to look at the messages you have posted. |
| Thomas Whitten | 10 Jun 2008 9:35 a.m. PST |
I don't like the idea as I would have to log out read anything. |
| Knight Templar | 10 Jun 2008 10:03 a.m. PST |
kyoteblue 10 Jun 2008 9:21 a.m. PST
Or not, depending…. How many of your c. 2,500 posts repeat this response? Are you trying to improve on OFM's ppm (posts per minute) method? |
| Devil Dice | 10 Jun 2008 10:04 a.m. PST |
What idea ? What did he say ? |
| nazrat | 10 Jun 2008 10:27 a.m. PST |
This is all just a bit too silly! |
| Jovian1 | 10 Jun 2008 10:39 a.m. PST |
I think we should have the "super-duper stifle button" which only stifles those people who have in the past, or may in the future, upset you so you don't have to deal with any negativity or worry about anyone sharing your wonderful thoughts on a topic. That way we will only have civil discussion now and in the future because you wouldn't see something unless it was nice. I think we can call this the "Yes Man Button" for all of TMP to welcome and adore! And now back to reality – do we really need any more grade-school silliness on TMP? I am opposed – very strongly opposed to the idea of a reverse-stifle button – I don't even like the stifle button in the first place. If you cannot self-censor what you read, then you have no business going on the internet in the first place. One man's obscentity is another man's dialectic response to lunacy. There – now you can have my two cents worth on this topic – or not. Just push the little button so you don't have to read my pearls of wisdom! |
| xxxxxxxxooooo | 10 Jun 2008 11:12 a.m. PST |
Or not, depending…  |
| darthfozzywig | 10 Jun 2008 11:42 a.m. PST |
I want a "double-secret probation" button, but we can't have everything. |
| La Long Carabine | 10 Jun 2008 12:59 p.m. PST |
You've been on "double-secret probation" since the beginning of the thread Mister. :-) LLC aka Ron |
| Steve Flanagan | 10 Jun 2008 1:19 p.m. PST |
I want a big red button with "Don't Press This Button" written on it. |
| mandt2 | 10 Jun 2008 2:25 p.m. PST |
What do I think of a reverse stifle button? It restates the negativeness of the universe. The hideous lonely emptiness of existance. Nothingness. The predicament of Man forced to live in a barren, Godless eternity like a tiny flame flickering in an immense void with nothing but waste, horror and degradation, forming a useless bleak straightjacket in a bleak absurd cosmos. Or, what Lentilus said. |
| Ditto Tango 2 1 | 10 Jun 2008 2:49 p.m. PST |
do we really need any more grade-school silliness on TMP? Which is exactly what the original post is. It reminds me of when my children were less than 5 and got into "Don't look at me" arguments. Its amazing how small minded some people can be. One despairs for the human race when one reads stuff like this.
--
Tim |
| Jovian1 | 10 Jun 2008 3:59 p.m. PST |
And now we shall degrade this topic further by posting name calling, face making and "touching" or "not-touching" other TMP members just to annoy them further! |
| La Long Carabine | 10 Jun 2008 9:39 p.m. PST |
He's looking at my profile. Bill make him stop. He doing it again!! LLC aka Ron |
| Grinning Norm | 11 Jun 2008 3:13 a.m. PST |
Ah…. a system where after you've posted your message, you get an enormous list, not unlike the cross-post page, where you can select the members who are allowed to see your message. Oh, that's called PM. So basically the system is already there! |
| rddfxx | 11 Jun 2008 5:52 a.m. PST |
Ditto, what Ditto Bird said |
| Connard Sage | 14 Jun 2008 4:49 a.m. PST |
I think we should have the "super-duper stifle button" which only stifles those people who have in the past, or may in the future, upset you so you don't have to deal with any negativity or worry about anyone sharing your wonderful thoughts on a topic. That way we will only have civil discussion now and in the future because you wouldn't see something unless it was nice.I think we can call this the "Yes Man Button" for all of TMP to welcome and adore! Or how about the "I only want to see fluffy bunny wabbits and think nice thoughts, make that nasty man go away" button? I don't know how some of these ruperts function in the real world. Do they collapse in a blubbering heap if anyone speaks to them without according their fragile egos due respect? Do they need even more therapy if someone looks at them a bit funny? |
