Hide Poster (again!)

[UltraBOF]

Hide me, hide me!

I think that it's time to revisit the arguments for this again: the site is much bigger and full of wankers than it used to be, and there is a lot of unnecessary conflict. Given that civilian moderators have been discounted, and that the community team's workload is practically Dickensian, don't you think that anything which will reduce personal attacks and thus the need for deletions would be a good thing?

I understand that Justine is worried that threads "won't make sense", but given that a) people mostly talk shite anyway and fly off-topic (eg Larkers in the face of Po-some OPs etc); and b) the hide button would be individually activated by choice and not compulsory, I don't think this argument really holds water.

There are many posters mature enough to never need to shield themselves from the profoundly irritating, and some folk are naturally imbued with a zen-like calm in the face of fucknuggetry, but for the rest of us, please please please give us the option to simply never have to read the posts of people we know invariably get on our last nerve.

I am convinced that spats will reduce; people will participate more widely and constructively in threads, instead of having to hide them once their nemesis appears; goading will become much less sustained; and the bill to MNHQ for gin at weekends will be slashed to pre-2005 levels.

What's not to like?

I agree with everything UltraBOF has said.

Hide Option = Excellent idea.

Please, please please Mumsnet, your argument that threads doesn't hold any water with me.

No, him not naked. There is another balder man in it who is actually way more attractive, especially when he goes all redemption..

Oh, if you're counting posts up like votes, I'm against.

Among other reasons because of this new level of supervision you're envisaging where HQ then have to police all the people saying, "I'm ignoring you."

And then the spats about whether an individual saying "I'm ignoring you" is OK and indeed courteous, but several people saying it isn't. And does that make the ignorers a clique and is this bullying and...

Much less dramatic for everyone to just ignore posters manually. Then no need for the Unhide This One Post So I Can Tell What the Jeff's Been Going On, either.

Btw, it doesn't work to say "nice MNers wouldn't do X", either, because if all MNers were nice there'd be no request for Ignore Poster in the first place. And even nice people can be nasty some days the whole of MN by the end of the summer holidays.

It would be impossible to have an edit button that let you fix typos without also letting you change your meaning.

Plus we'd miss out on beauties like this

I dunno I don't really care either way about the hide poster, but whenever it gets discussed people suggest a "like" button, and I really, really, really, really (x a gazillion times) really don't want that.

I'd be afraid they'd do them at the same time, which would ruin mumnset in my opinion.

Oh, and no to edit buttons - for wonderful typo reasons as well as to stop fuckwits changing their posts and claiming they never said something or other.

If anything really needs editing, mnhq can (and do) do it if asked.

I don't agree with a hide poster option, tbh.

People would figure out that they were hidden by certain posters because they would be ignored by the hider, for example if they asked them a question or tried to speak to them on a thread.

Plus, you'd probably get lots of "why are you ignoring me?" PMs.

Oops
Sorry for typo

....the argument that threads won't make sense doesn't hold any water with me

I've just realised I've done what everyone moans about, just carrried on talking about that film and ignored the rest of the thread, not even addressed it to anyone...

WELL I DON'T CARE

Edit buttons are not needed

You'd only get one "why are you ignoring me?" PM, then you'd use the "block" option.

I think people who want a hide button should just move to Twitter where you can sculpt your timeline to reflect your own views perfectly. It's awful how effectively huge parts of the internet are becoming uncritical mirrors for users, just throwing back at them "things you might like," "things your friend's like," "things you searched for before that probably reflect the kind of stuff you are interested in now."

It seems like there are lots of pressure for turning the internet from a massive resource for looking outwards into something that just confirms us in the views we already have.

So I like a place where we are exposed to lots of views and comments and posting styles we find challenging. The people who make me stupidly angry/upset here aren't "goaders" or trolls or whatever. They are just people who disagree with me, and who I want to persuade of my opposing view but can't! It would seem pretty awful to cleanse myself of that anger by just blocking my ears.

Don't be ridiculous Oaty, Twiter is completely different to a forum.

Exactly, Trills. THat is what I think. It is different because it is not organised around shared conversations, but instead around personal affiliations/following. Once you have a commitment to shared conversations it becomes problematic to let everyone see a different set of contributions.

very handsome AND redemptive on yo ass

bit of a Tosar though, i hear

He looks just like Robbie Williams.

HE DOES NOT LOOK ONE BIT LIKE THAT NUTTER

huh

oh god he does a bit...damn

I just can't see why it would be an issue. There are posters who post a load of shit with the express intention to wind up posters who are actually trying to help an OP.
The whole purpose of the thread, to give actual advice goes out of the window because a certain person wants to cause trouble.

So hide that person and continue to advise the op. everyone's happy.
The person who is trying to cause all the trouble may then stop acting like an idiot if there is no one there to bloody argue with.

Actually, I've changed my mind. It's not that I disagree with a "hide poster" button, I just probably wouldn't use it. No one on here offends me that much.

It might make me a little paranoid when I got ignored though (often) :o.

The difficulty with that Tantrums, is that the (possibly newbie) op wouldn't know to hide the troublemaker and would continue to see his/her posts.

No-one sensible would see them and so wouldn't refute the shite they were spouting.

So on serious advice and support threads it could be a problem. On arsey-around threads, it would be fine (apart from the hidee being able to complain of the bullies sending him/her to coventry, which would also happen),

So don't argue with them. Don't feed the troll and all that.

Disappearing a particular person's posts doesn't solve the problem if other people are engaging with them, as half the thread becomes replies to the goader.

I have come down on the side of against. Sorry.

I think it would be useful only in the case of serious nutters (vis FWR) and they normally get bored and fuck off eventually anyway.

I wouldn't be against a trial run though if MNHQ are up for it - just for larks

Yy, MaryZ, newbies and vulnerable posters would miss out on support when they were attacked/misled. Obviously not everyone is up to the fight every day, but I'd rather be on a forum where people generally help out than always walk away.

Isn't that the very essence of a self-moderating forum?