Mute user button?

[ifIwerenotanandroid]

It would be very useful to have a 'mute user' button covering either one thread or everything on MN.

It may be that there's a poster you just can't stand, for whatever personal reason; or a poster may display troll-like tendencies which can't be called out, under MN rules, & may not be sufficient for MN to delete their posts - or there may just be a time lag in MN dealing with them. In these cases, a 'mute user' button would be invaluable.

It would be even more useful if the muting applied to all usernames associated with that user, so that name changes don't mean having to see their posts.

On twitter/X, I use the block button in this way, to shut out people I don't want to hear from - on there, I can always choose to look at a post by someone I've blocked & sometimes I do. So that facility would be useful, too.

It would be even more useful if the muting applied to all usernames associated with that user, so that name changes don't mean having to see their posts.

But surely that would 'out' their other user names? You'd just have to look at other threads and see who else you've managed to mute with that one click. So I don't think that would work.

You're probably right @Charabanc . Well, just on one username would still be useful - & quicker to implement.😁(Will nobody think of the software engineers?)

Why on earth is this necessary?

There is no obligation for you to read posts if you dont want to.

I’m pretty sure this has been requested several times over the years - there are valid objections, one being that it might make a thread incomprehensibly ‘Swiss cheese’, and you’d see responses with bits quoted without the context. Maybe it’d work better now the quote function works properly on the app as well as the browser as presumably you’d want quote chains including the muted user to be fully muted too? (Ah…but will no one think of the developers, that might be harder…)

On the other hand it might help with threads where someone is ‘sealioning’, and/or multiple people respond which can derail a thread and also look like a ‘pile on’ - might be better if the majority could roll their eyes and mute?

@ErrolTheDragon I don't find it a problem on twitter/X. And if it could be done so that a user can see where the muted posts are & could select one & see it where clarification or context is needed, then I think it could work.

I agree, I think it could be helpful in keeping a thread on topic.

If only.

Having been repeatedly sitting on my hands just now and then failing to… I’m leaning more towards the idea. 😂

Hi there @ifIwerenotanandroid. Thanks for getting in touch with this idea.

As @ErrolTheDragon mentioned, it is something that's been discussed previously and, for several reasons, we've always felt that it wouldn't work. Mainly for reasons of Swiss cheese, as mentioned here, but also that it just feels a bit 'against the spirit of conversation' if people can create their own 'echo chambers' here by excluding the thoughts of posters they disagree with. One of the great things about Mumsnet (if we do say so ourselves) is that we are an open forum where anyone can share their views within reaason and as long as they do so politely, and we think that's a great thing. Sometimes people might change their minds about something as a result of seeing another viewpoint; sometimes they may not but it still broadens the conversation.

We see what you're saying about trolls that aren't exactly trolls, and we know that can feel annoying, but again, if they aren't breaking Talk guidelines enough to be deleted or banned, it feels a bit wrong that they can be excluded somehow? Added to which, there is always the opportunity to scroll by and ignore if you've reported and we've found there's no breach of guidelines.

So, that was or thinking in the past when this has come up. We will pass your thoughts upwards though. We're always happy to have another think and revisit ideas like this.

@HebeMumsnet in that case could you put them on some sort of cooling off period, if various reports have been received?
Maybe some time out would help to get the thread back in track.

Thank you @HebeMumsnet . One thing that occurred to me is the possibility of colouring posts rather than making them disappear - the same way MN, OP & our own posts are coloured. Then the words would still be there, but it would be much easier to skim over those posts (& replies to them) & stick to ones which aren't goady & time-wasting. Has that been considered?

I’m thinking that in some instances what’s needed is a more defined way to handle derailing. On some threads it’s fine for the subject to wander, but there are others which are clearly intended for a specific purpose and it can become very annoying and unproductive if someone takes over a thread with posts which are at best tangential to that purpose. Maybe if there are lots of reports about a ‘derailer’, MNHQ should make it clear they should start their own thread to continue their line of discussion?

@HebeMumsnet as long as they do so politely

This is the issue though. Grown up, polite, taking-it-in-turn conversation is fine. But a lot of the time it’s simply spiteful and bitter rudeness. Are you saying I can report every instance of this I see and you’ll read the comment every time? Because you might need to employ another full time worker then.

As you can see by my user name, I’m so tired of interacting with a lot of people here. I still read, but I’m wary of posting.

I’d love to have an upvote and downvote system where it was visible to all.

Trouble is, reporting gets you nowhere. Mn hq seem to just look at the individual post, not the point of the multiple posts or deliberate derailing.
It's up to others to not respond, but that's not working.

I also think that people would be almost too quick to mute posters that don’t validate them, or have a counter agreement. I’ve also had some back and forth with posters before and felt some words were unnecessary, but months later noticed the same user was on the same page with me on another thread.

The tribunal thread has had an influx of repetitive/goading/pointlessly argumentative posters, leading to at least two more calls for a mute button. If MNHQ keeps a wishlist from users, please add 'mute user' to it.

I'd quite like to see a mute button.
Maybe it expires afer 24 hours, 3 days, or a week, that way it's not permanent. You can add them again after it expires.

Maybe have a maximum number of muted people. Say 3, after that if you want to mute a new person you have to unmute 1 to make room. Premium users get more mute slots. I would pay for that.

There a lot of topics debated very passionately on mumsnet, people disagreeing left right and centre but every so often, it feels like someone is derailling a thread on purpose in bad faith, and it is the debate that suffers.

Suspending based on report numbers is ripe for abuse. Find out how many reports it takes, make sure to submit that many reports. Always gets abused.

I think this would be a good post for OP. Just certain threads not all. But when it's OP it does seem veey unkind to pile on and repeat the same things!

I wouodnt mind if others could see but I would just think it would be a good idea if OP could mute that 1 poster.

I had a recent thread and had to request it was deleted because people were being very rude and it was the same couple of posters asking extremely rude questions!

Something needs to be flagged when people ask the same things too repeatedly.

If it's possible, I think the OP's idea of a 'mute' button that just colours the muted posts for the muter would work well. The muter can just scroll by, and others can read those posts and respond accordingly. That would prevent the echo chamber effect for most people.

Just bumping this thread to ask if MN has considered the request to introduce the ability to colour 'posts/users to ignore' yet, as suggested upthread. There's a currently active thread that desperately needs this facility, as trying to read the actual discussion has become very difficult due to it being first peppered & then overwhelmed by a single user.

No other user would know that the 'mark to ignore' facility had been activated by any other user. It would just make everyone else's MN experience better. I can't see a problem with it, so I'd be interested in MN's response to the suggestion.

I don't reallly see the value in that idea. You'd still have to scroll past that user's replies, but now - they're highlighted to you! Our eyes are naturally drawn to something that stands out from the norm.

Plus, it could be used as a sort of "immediate Advanced Search" function on a thread, in order to target one particular poster.

I kind of have my own with two posters. They are both so tedious I just skim their posts and don’t read them!

@charabanc For me it would work the other way - I'd find it easy to scroll past any (say) pale orange-coloured posts because I know the value is elsewhere. It would need to colour any of that user's posts which are quoted, too. For me, it would be easier to spot unwanted posts by colour than by constantly checking usernames in identical-looking posts.

I don't understand what you think anyone would be doing & why, in your second point.

I don't understand what you think anyone would be doing & why, in your second point.

Say, I don't like a particular user. Or I want to troll them. Or I want to track them. Or I hope I can work out who they are IRL. I "mute" them in a thread, and then - bingo! All their replies in that thread are now usefully highlighted to me. I can reply to them individually, or quote them, or generally make mischief.

Have to say I'd find this incredibly distracting and would draw my attention to those posts! I just notice the username and take great satisfaction in scrolling past and letting my mind be free of whatever bollocks they posted.