"tmp ignore a good start" Topic

many forums have a feature that allows you to ignore a person whose posts prevent you from getting the most out of the forum, for whatever reason.

that "ignore" usually means that 1) anything that person posts does not appear onscreen when you are logged into your member account (and threads started by that person don't show up at all) and 2) any summary that is provided of postings to the forum does not include ignored posters or their threads…..

i'm glad we have now got 2), i'm sure it will help a lot of folks out. maybe when tmp4 goes into place we will have 1) also???

i know i would appreciate it because i visit only a few tmp forums and so i don't look at the front page, i look at those forums directly. so the current ignore (when it gets fixed anyway) does not help me because i do not read from the front page.

these things all contribute to a better forum because people spend less time arguing over forum etiquette and more time discussing the forum's basic topic, which is good!!!

also, the fact that you have ignored someone, or been ignored, is usually kept private, which also helps to keep the forum from becoming unfriendly. keeping stifles and ignores private would be the best way to go.

It's the gift that keeps on giving…

I figure what's the difference between an ignore and a stifle also how many of each you have should only be visible to the member not everyone

Maybe the Editor should start a forum etiquette board so you guys can go to it and argue over imaginary etiquette rules, and leave the TMP Talk board for legitimate issues.

seems like etiquette is a legitimate tmp issue. also etiquette is not imaginary, it's a real thing. why does it upset you that people want to be able to set this sort of preference?

New features are nice and there is nothing wrong with talking about them. But do not assume on an international website that your notions of "etiquette" are shared by everybody.

the good thing about ignore functions is that you don't have to worry about imposing netiquette rules.

or as you might put it, the idea that "notions of etiquette have to be shared by everybody" in order to apply.

i disagree with that as a justification for just throwing your hands up and letting people behave however they want, but ignore is a great way to outflank the entire issue. you can just opt out of reading messages from people who post in a way that decreases your enjoyment.

There are already rules for posting. Your "behavior" ideas do not bear any relevance to this website, and only serve to add ambiguity and strife. Or are you continuing to dwell on it because you are jealous, and hide your jealousy with scorn and shame-flinging and go into a rage whenever your target of jealousy appears? Show some self-restraint, and don't impose your notions of "etiquette" and "behavior" on others.

I just wish it was turned on again…

Doug

not sure where that came from rebelyell, lol. so why does having an ignore that filters out all content from ignored posters bother you again?

it's something we could all click on and then never have to see posts from that person again. what is so outrageous about that?

by the way, forum netiquette is not something i just invented. virtually every forum has rules of good behavior. here's one totally at random:

link

read the eighth bullet point, that's what annoys me and many other people here about certain posters. also, read the sixth bullet point. that one you might want to take to heart yourself. :)

not sure where that came from rebelyell

Your complaints of behavior and etiquette caused that. If it really bothers you, just click the ignore button and move on. "Behavior" and "etiquette" are subjective terms, like "ethics" and "morality", so if forum rules are not being broken just click the ignore button and move on because that poster won't see the problem from his or her point of view.

You might want to familiarize yourself with the last bullet point. Because this is the TMP, not a UVA sports website. And then familiarize yourself with these.

Of course, those most in need of etiquette are apparently violently opposed to the notion. What a surprise.

So the "Ignore" function does not go far enough.

So Dear Editor has to now "fix" things so that the ritual purity of not being able to see the unclean will be absolute.

So Dear Editor has to now "fix" things so that the ritual purity of not being able to see the unclean will be absolute.

It may require animal sacrifice. I'm not sure if TMP 4.0 will have that feature.

Whether a member chooses to use the Ignore or Stifles is a personal choice and should not be a matter of public discussion.

Thank you guys, for at least adding some humour to this thread.

Is that allowed?

Is that allowed?

I dunno. Laughter might be perceived as poor behavior and a lack of proper etiquette.

OK, I am confused, well maybe not confused but perturbed.

The 400 count front page and the overstifle have still not placated some of the Tango Dislikers?

Nuke 'em, it's the only way to be sure.

Well, the OFM said it would happen, and here we are. 8)=

Hm, from reading this I would think the ignore users are happy.

The ignore has been turned off for about a day which some are not happy with. (understandably) Hopefully it will be back soon.

The only complaints seem to be from the people opposing the implementation of the ignore feature.

I'm happy.

Oh, the paradox!

Funny how appeasement never seems to work!!

I think the Allies tried the Ignore feature from 1935 through 1939.

You know of course there are those who neither "hate" nor "dislike" Tango that are glad for the new option.I for one being one of them.I don't "hate" or "dislike" him. But it seems that some here think that only those who did want it and are happy with the new optionare the only ones. I am glad for the "Ignore" option. Thanks Bill.

The 400 count front page and the overstifle have still not placated some of the Tango Dislikers?

I think those two functions will have placated (or will placate, once the Ignore is fully functioning) those so-called 'Tango Dislikers' who use the front page as their main entry to TMP. After all, if Tango (or whoever) is ignored, there'll be nothing visible to even be able to complain about.

However, neither of those functions are likely to placate those who use the message boards as their way into TMP. That is totally understandable, because neither function is designed to operate on the message boards at all.

In fact, those supporting the promised Ignore could reasonably have assumed it would also cover the message boards – but it doesn't. So any continuing lobbying for change from this group is fair enough.

Of course, even if that was implemented, nothing will stop some people from still complaining – on both sides. There'll be those who don't know about the Ignore feature, those who feel a technical solution to a perceived behavioural problem is some sort of violation of their own rights, and of course those who are just purposeful poop-stirrers.

Rebelyell,
funniest image i've seen for a while. Thanks for sharing!

I agree with Heinz Good Aryan and Arteis. I certainly assumed that the 'ignore' feature would extend to the message boards, as the original poll question said nothing about it being restricted to the front page only. It said:

it blocks from your view any topics which that person initiates.

(original emphasis)

If I have chosen to 'ignore' all of a member's topics for whatever reason, why would I then want to see them on the message boards? And since the message boards don't identify the originator, it's impossible to skip over those topics by checking the member name first.

Please consider this as a general point on the function of this feature, rather than being about your feelings one way or another over any particular member or perceived motivations.

Excuse me, sir? How do you spell "Aristides the Just?"

Seriously, though…
Ignore 1.0 has screwed up the front page enough for everybody. It made TMP impossibly difficult to load and slow to navigate.

Hasn't your petty little vendettas done enough damage?
Oh, sure. Let's make Ignore a full Monty. Then we can all pretend we are using AOL dial-up waiting for TMP pages to load.

"Your complaints of behavior and etiquette caused that. If it really bothers you, just click the ignore button and move on."

wrong -- there's no call to be rude over a diagreement on how an internet forum can be read, of all things. the fact that i'm asking for an additional option to ignore threads started by members i don't like is no excuse for you to personally insult the person who diagrees with you.

"Your complaints of behavior and etiquette caused that. If it really bothers you, just click the ignore button and move on."

So, what is insulting about this quote?

So, what is insulting about this quote?

And the follow-up question: if you can't just move on, or Stifle and move, or Ignore and move on, or hit the Complaint button and move on, or a combination of all of the above, why not just…just…

Actually, I've got nothing after that. If someone is terribly offended by your comment, you'd think one of MANY options would suffice. Or a combination of them.

It's usually enough for me to just shake my head, make a pithy comment, and move on. But that's just me.

People are honing in too much that the Ignore is aimed purely and only at Tango. Yes, it was the Tango crisis that finally spurred its inception, and for some he will indeed be their first Ignore subject.

However, whatever caused it to finally implemented on TMP, the Ignore function is a common or garden feature of many websites and social media. And that's because the ability to hide posters whose topics don't INTEREST you is not the same as (though it may include) hiding topics started by someone you DON'T LIKE.

For example, I intend to use the Ignore as a kind of reverse-Follow on my little mobile phone whilst travelling to and from work. Scrolling on my little phone with my big fingers is an absolute pain. And as I'm not particularly interested in the majority of topics on the front-page, I need to just keep scrolling and scrolling, wasting my limited commuting time.

So … if I can set up another account and then start Ignoring those who frequently start topics that don't interest me, then gradually over time I'll have less and less to scroll through to get to the particular TMPers whose topics I know will nearly always entertain me.

I can already do this to a degree, of course, by filtering the boards that appear on the front page. But I don't want to limit the subject matter – I just want to access more easily the topics by those few posters I enjoy most, no matter what boards they post on.

And, sorry, that means I'll be Ignoring many of you. But don't worry, it's not because I don't like you. It's just that you're not someone I'm particularly interested in following during my limited commuting time.

Some here have said any sort of filtering is bad, because you might miss the gold amongst the dross. Well, because I already don't read most of the topics on TMP, that isn't a big deal for me. In any case, I'll still have my main account (without any mass Igoring) for when I'm at home on my computer and with plenty of time to spare.

Everyone should just have a X threads per 24 hour period limit. If you hit that limit and have more time to kill, you can always post in other people's threads.

My suggestions for X:

Non supporting member: 2

Supporting member: 5

Interesting idea….not a new one though. I have a counter idea, let everyone post as many threads as they like as long as they are linked to wargaming etc in some way and aren't breaking any rules, and are posted with the intention of sharing someone's love of the hobby. If someone then appears to be posting lots of threads just to annoy people or spam the board then let the editors deal with it. Maybe too radical? Maybe too tolerant?

Interesting idea, nathaniel. But I personally prefer letting people post as much as they like, but also letting other people filter as much as they like, using a robust and comprehensive ignore function.

It doesnt work anymore? I still have topics started by the user i have ignored in the frontpage. It worked during one or two days, now itsnt working

Um John. It hasn't affected me in the least since it was implemented.