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?

[UltraBOF]

I don't think that name changes would be hidden, no, or it would out people, wouldn't it?

[ScreamingNaanAndGoryOn]

TBH I'd only hide those on the permanent wind up.

I'd still like the chance to do it though.

[TantrumsAndBalloons]

There's only one person who I would hide forever and ever and ever.

Just one.

[TantrumsAndBalloons]

And I would request they hide me as well.

[FangsGoForTheMaidensThroat]

I so want to know who you are all meaning (probably me)

[JenaiMarrHePlaysGuitar]

BOF that's one reason why the hide poster function would't be that great; either it wouldn't work because people namechange a lot, or it would out namechangers unfairly.

The only posts I've ever wanted to hide were enitire threads; you can of course do that but they still appear in the Most Active box. Without wishing to get all maudlin (it was a long time ago and I'm fine now) when I had my miscarriage the last thing I wanted to see was the newest chirpy name of my antenatal club thread popping up top right hand corner.

[TantrumsAndBalloons]

I can assure you it is not anyone on this thread.

[SquirtedPerfumeUpNoseInBoots]

I would like this. I don't normally get worked up over differences of opinion but there is one poster who really ruffles my feathers. Haven't seen her about for a while now I think of it, but if I came across her again I'd hide her. She may have nc though.

I don't think you'd be able to have automatic hiding of people who nc. It would defeat the purpose. If I had hidden only one poster called X, and there's a thread with a hidden poster called Y, then it's not hard to work out the nc.

[SquirtedPerfumeUpNoseInBoots]

Oops. Cross post.

[D0oinMeCleanin]

Generally when people NC it is to protect their normal persona, so you'd only need to hide the persona that annoys you anyway, there'd be no need to also hide the name changes, unless they went on to be equally annoying under the NC, then you hide that persona too.

[TunipTheVegemal]

Best thing is not to have to log into My Mumsnet. Just put an 'ignore' button next to the 'report' 'message poster' buttons. Make it as easy as poss and then when someone namechanges and you notice it's them you can re-hide them easily. You can also unhide easily when you calm down.

[UltraBOF]

That's true, Tunip. Easy come, easy go might be better. Allows tempers to cool.

[BlameItOnTheCuervForHumanBlood]

If the hidee namechanges, they will still make your eyes itch, so you hide them again.

Simple.

[mamapower]

I haven't really posted for almost 2 years now but am starting to have the time now to read and contribute towards more and more threads. I have noticed that there are certainly more posters who seem to be 'looking for a fight' in that they say things they know will insight controversy or are just plain old nasty. However, MN is becoming a bigger and bigger community and with that, as in RL, comes a greater diversity of believes and opinions and knobheaded attention seekers. We won't all get on, we won't all agree, that's life. If someone is a total fuckwit and is clearly attention seeking, I think they are just best ignored. If we start censoring we remove a persons freedom of speech, and that, IMHO is a slippery slope to a community that I for one, would not wish to be a part of. MNHQ seem quite swift to react to threads/posters or are reported for being offensive etc, I think that's really all we can/should expect/want.

[UltraBOF]

It's not censoring anybody though, it is precisely as you say, ignoring them. It just makes it much easier.

[greenhill]

Even though I completely agree with free speech and paraphrase the quote attributed to Voltaire "I disagree with everything you say, but will defend to the death, your right to say it"; sometimes some people are just being obnoxious for the sake of it and I would prefer to not have to read some of the more goading, taunting or just plain bad mannered comments masquerading as being part of a genuine discussion.

Only recently have I started to report comments, after 5 years on the site, as IMO some posters are sailing close to the wind in terms of nastiness / shit stirring and have learnt how to be as offensive as possible, whilst still remaining within the Talk Guidelines.

[OliviaLMumsnet]

Ahem
I am not sure the words arsing fuckhead were used.

NB I am yet to read this full thread and will get back to you in a bit (inbox overdrive)

[UltraBOF]

But we all knew that that's what Justine meant

[AmazingBouncingFerret]

See hide poster would be perfect for those arseholes that manage to stay just on the right side of talk guidelines yet still piss you off.

So instead of needlessly reporting arseholes we could just hide arseholes which will in turn make your inbox seem a lot more attractive, manageable and much less hectic Olivia.

[TunipTheVegemal]

Ferret - EXACTLY.

[UltraBOF]

If there were a universally-available script which would do this, I would never darken MNHQ's door again over this issue. I've never been able to access one, unfortunately, as I MN from an iPad or my phone.

I can only imagine the bliss, Hothead

[WildThongyoumakemyringsting]

Is there a reason mnhq dont want it?
It may be worth a trial to see how it goes. I try not to get involved in some of the controversial (sp) themes myself since someone suggested I should go and live in Iran because I didnt agree with them. MN is great company but I think some people are a bit deliberately 'stirry'.

[UltraBOF]

I think the main reason that MNHQ give is that without seeing everybody's contribution, threads become disjointed. This doesn't really hold water though, as posts are regularly deleted or withdrawn, and a few people have been in the unfortunate position of having to delete their entire posting history, which affects several older threads. As I alluded to in my OP, lots of threads in Classics, sadly, now make no sense at all. It also ignores the fact that threads won't be disjointed at all for most people, and the ones that are will be at the user's own behest.

The other reason usually given is that we should all do our best not to let people wind us up: again, this doesn't fly for me, because I think a Hide button would help rather than hinder this.

A related reason is that people should educate posters they disagree with rather than ignore them. The sort of moderate and cool-headed MNers who are capable of this without personal attacks are, I believe, the ones who have little need for a Hide Poster button, and wouldn't use it anyway. So education, rather than lost tempers, would still prevail. I think this argument also falls down because the posters who consistently irk and provoke while sailing underneath the deletion threshold are often impervious to reasoned debate, and in many cases know ^exactly what they're doing.

Objections which have been raised here also include the fomenting of paranoia, to which I would say we have to remember that nobody is owed a reply to anything, and that people are often overlooked anyway in the pace of a thread- we'd have to just remind ourselves of that.

Related to the paranoia point is that people would huff about threatening to hide each other. This one is easily dealy with by making it against etiquette, and a reportable post along the lines of a personal attack/other guidelines breach.

I hope I haven't taken too long replying- I'm trying to type this while watching Dallas .