Why Can't We Have An 'Ignore' Button?

[CKDexterHaven]

Mumsnet is a constant target for trolls and anti-social men's rights types who constantly derail threads, constantly rehash old tired arguments and sometimes post downright offensive comments. Wouldn't it be easier for women to get together and talk in the way they want to talk and keep threads on-topic if there was an 'ignore' button as there is on other sites.

If you are unfamiliar with this it is a button which allows individual users to block the posts of posters they feel to be trolls, deliberately offensive or derailers. It does not prevent people who wish to see these posts from seeing them. There are people out there who really hate that women get to talk to one another and it would be great to just skip over them.

Other forums have this, why can't we?

[Sparklingbrook]

You should have hidden the thread Kablooger. Ignoring it would mean not posting on it surely?

[OneSkinnyChip]

It would rely on common sense but actually I think it would be useful. There are a couple of posters who I think completely derail threads on certain topics and I would quite like to ignore them and focus on the OP.

In a few cases (especially on the FWR threads) I would happily tell the GFs and MRAs that I'm ignoring them. I often lurk rather than post on these threads because I can't be bothered engaging with the bastard trolls. That seems crazy - that women can't post freely about women's rights on a board predominantly for women. There was a thread during the week which I would have liked to contribute to but it had been completely dominated by a MRA type. He totally derailed the discussion. I admired the people who responded but then the thread became all about him and not the OP.

[BoneyBackJefferson]

My hope for the FWR threads would be that people get savvy to the trolls pretty quickly and block en-masse, instead of engaging them in argument, and thereby the thread would still be easy to follow.

Then it could become a feminist board and not as a board to discuss feminism on.

[4boysxhappy]

It would end up as a form of censorship.

Already the idea of free speak is not allowed if it mentions a subject that might affect others or posters will go off topic to attack a poster on a personal level when it comes to a lack of understanding about issues around abuse.

Trolls will only win if you keep censoring. The same way terrorists win if we are to scared to live are lifes as before.

[WhereforeArtThou]

I'd love a hide poster bottom. There a a few posters who I would be happy to hide. I can't see why it's not an option. If I choose to hide someone it doesn't effect anyone except for me! If it ends up making a thread incomprehensible then that would be my own problem and no one else's.

[WhereforeArtThou]

Lol, auto correct. I'm sure I would like a hide poster bottom but perhaps a hide poster button would be a better idea

[WorraLiberty]

If I choose to hide someone it doesn't effect anyone except for me! If it ends up making a thread incomprehensible then that would be my own problem and no one else's.

I still think it might affect others.

If you were chatting about oranges and a poster you've hidden mentions lemons, a lot of replies might suddenly focus on lemons. At some point you're likely to say "But no-one's talking about lemons!! Read the OP!"

Cue many replies and X posts, explaining to you why we're suddenly talking about lemons.

[WhereforeArtThou]

If when you hid a poster it was apparent on the thread then if the conversation started to take a different path the it would be clear that it would be because of the hidden posts.

[Panzee]

On other sites in the gap for your hidden poster it says GoadyFuckerTroll has posted here but it is hidden. So you know that if it's getting weird it's because everyone is engaging with GoadyFuckerTroll. It's not difficult to handle.

[WorraLiberty]

Ahh I see

Still, when said GoadyFuckerTroll makes a goady fucker trollish comment, it's bound to be copied and pasted by everyone who replies to them anyway.

[Panzee]

Yeah, quoting still rankles.

[capant]

I would rather MNHQ hire more people to respond to reports, much quicker.

[EdithWeston]

"Then it could become a feminist board and not as a board to discuss feminism on."

It'll never be a "feminist board" and I think the assumption that it could be has caused a huge number of quite heated threads. MNHQ have been really clear that it's another MN board on which to discuss feminism. And have maintained his position through a number of (lengthy) threads, where this has been thrashed out in detail.

[WorraLiberty]

[AttentionSeekingFantasist]

It's not the GFs that get me, it's the boredom. I find some posters - no doubt highly regarded and valued by many others - popping up on thread after thread with yet another made-up problem, or re-posting the same revolting anecdote they posted last month. I skim over names when I notice them, but would like to be able to just make them go away. My doing so would not impact in any way on anyone else's use of the site. Or I could just get off MN and get a life...

[CKDexterHaven]

I don't want to hide threads because I might be interested in discussing the topic. I don't see it as a censorship issue as it wouldn't prevent other people seeing the posts you have ignored. I don't see what individual posters would lose by having this. I know for sure there are some posters who would have me on 'ignore' and don't care about this because I would still be free to post.

[Sparklingbrook]

I am happy to hide a thread about anything because I don't want to discuss topics with GFs and trolls and people who don't know when to let it lie.

MN isn't that important.

[BoneyBackJefferson]

Edith

I remember the threads about it, but if a group were to form (and they have done in the past oldies/moldies etc.) it would be possible to subvert the boards.

It should also be pointed out that one posters "goadyfuckertroll" is another posters good point, so what happens when the alleged "goadyfuckertroll's" points are taken up by other posters?

[LatteLoverLovesLattes]

Other forums have this, why can't we

There are 101 back threads if you want to read MN's stance on this, not doing it makes perfect sense.

If someone is being A Goady Fucker, just ignore them and report them (they sometimes get banned. I know they only have to set up a new account to start again, but it's a hassle to do, so eventually they might find another playground). They feed off of replies - so don't feed them!

[capsium]

I quite like the possibility of them. I don't want to be agreed with all the time. Challenge is good, it tests your views. Being deliberately offensive however is not, and where I would draw the line. Although I often let it go though, so people can see them for what they are, which is not to be taken altogether seriously. I can fully understand deletion though, especially if confidential information is posted.

So if I was to ignore I would rather ignore as I do in real life and that is not respond.

[Panzee]

But WorraLiberty if you hide the lemon you can't play Travelling Lemon...

[capsium]

^I like the possibility of trolls that is. I think people 'troll' in real life by being overly eristic, or critical for the sake of being critical and playing 'devil's advocate'.

[EdithWeston]

"I remember the threads about it, but if a group were to form (and they have done in the past oldies/moldies etc.) it would be possible to subvert the boards."

Yes, possible, but I'd hope not likely. For subverting boards to limit (legal) freedom of expression would mean bullying others into silence had come to MN and that would be a shame. But starting a new website or other online group is always an option for those who would prefer that to a (mainly) unmoderated site. And the unmoderated ethos is a positive point for many.