"Ignore Thread" option please.

[GeekyGuy]

Still hoping there's a way to negotiate this one in the near future. There are folks here that have been members for years, and I don't want to have to ignore them in order to not see a particular thread they may have posted (and sometimes even that's not an option). But there are some threads -- honestly and plainly -- I just don't wanna see each time I enter a particular forum. Some of this stuff hits me where it hurts, touching on ideas that I feel shouldn't even be discussed where they're being discussed.

Please give more consideration to implementing this feature.

Thank you.

 

[KleinesSinchen]

I like how we shrug e-toxicity off by saying "turn the screen off".. Very productive... So easy... Wait... No, it's not...

JuSt DOnT loOK aT IT

Not sure what is the point of the random distribution of capital letters here… are you making fun of the statement? Or criticizing it? I’ll just take the words only (being unable to understand the rest).
Well, generally I’m not a fan of blocking/ignoring/filtering… functions. The reason for this is exactly what you said in the sentence with the random capital letters: It is just looking away (permanently). Just closing the eyes instead of dealing with a problem.
The word toxic is overused in my opinion. It almost inevitably pops up whenever there are different opinions and it will pop up once there is at least one person showing sufficient amount of feeling.
I fail at seeing how “e-toxicity” or “online bullying” (when not connected to the real life identity!) should have any notable impact on the reader. Alas, I am – like almost always – part of a minority here.
What I meant above with “turn off the Televisor” is just leaving for a while. If something gets unbearable, if feelings get intense, it is the best to take a break. After calming down one can either choose to participate (again) and post their own point of view in civil manner… or not participate (anymore). If an incident is so severe that you can’t be bear it for whatever reason, a permanent ignoring with a technical function is a way more intense form of “JuSt DOnT loOK aT IT” than logging out for an hour or a day and dealing with it afterwards.

I see this suggested a lot when this topic comes and I honestly don’t think this suggestion is all that helpful. Members are expressing ways that they would like to see in order to avoid conflict and this clearly isn’t a working suggestion for them. I think the staff really needs to reconsider constantly falling back on this reply because it’s not helpful.

I disagree on this.

Avoiding conflict… How would more blocking functions avoid conflict? I don’t get it. People susceptible to getting aggravated or hurt by online posts (not being able to just ignore them in brain) will suddenly refrain from getting involved in heated (toxic?) debates… just because they can click on “ignore” rather than just ignore it themselves? Honest question: Why should those people even consider clicking on ignore instead of doing what they always did and just bicker away?

Why must such discussions and suggestions sooner or later include criticism of staff behavior? This thread contains a sensible suggestion: Allow ignoring threads. (Next question would be if the underlying forum software even offers the tools for this). Just why should staff be obliged to reconsider an equally sensible answer? When a technological solution(?) isn't available, there is still our brain. Learning to deal with unpleasant situations and unpleasant people is very helpful. It is a needed ability in everyday life, where no block/hide/ignore/ban/kick/disconnect/whatever button exists.
There are unpleasant people out there. People, who are completely different from the own mindset. We have to accept this fact. We can’t click on ignore when standing in front of a person. And sometimes we can’t even walk away and have to face such people.

About “Staff needs to reconsider […]” in general:
Internet moderation is hard in my opinion. One can only do it wrong!

• If staff intervenes, “they are abusing power”, “suppressing different opinions”, “not allowing free speech”, “overmoderate” and so on.
• If they don’t intervene at some point, “they are tolerating toxicity”, “not doing anything against harassment”, “accepting […]-phob comments” and so on.

I think there would be far less issues if members were allowed to just completely hide sections they don’t want to be involved in.

If one really is unable to cope with some content and needs technical help in ignoring: It is still possible to solve this client side. Why wait for somebody else to implement it? Just do it yourself! Not hard to figure out something like this:
gbatemp.net##.node—unread.node--forum.node--depth2.node--id290.node
Gone is the politics section (and to some extent it is possible to do the same with two click with a single thread).



==========
==========
I seriously hope my post isn't considered toxic as well. I assure having good intentions. I love discussion and I like deviating opinions. The filtering options available on the internet go too far in my opinion, which means controversial discussion could disappear at some point. This will do no good.
Hopefully I didn't mess up the wording. It is still hard for me to express more complex stuff in English.

 

[r1vver]

Just closing the eyes instead of dealing with a problem.

Sometimes there is simply no problem.
Not always everything consists of some kind of drama. Sometimes it's just absolutely not interesting to follow the (possible) development of a thread.
But updates to this absolutely uninteresting thread will take their place among the updates in new posts. And even reading the title in the list of updates will already be a waste of time.
Of course, this is not fatally unpleasant, but if it is possible to implement it, then it would be convenient to have such an opportunity.
The key word here is "convenience".

 

[The Catboy]

Why must such discussions and suggestions sooner or later include criticism of staff behavior?

The reason I bring this up is that it's tiresome when members try to give suggestions and are met with either dismissive or sarcastic comments from the staff. It's not helpful for the staff to give the same kind of comment each time this kind of suggestion comes up. Users are looking to find ways to improve their experience on the Temp and dismissive comments towards their attempts only contribute towards creating a less than welcoming environment. Why even have a place for suggestions when the answer is often "no" and sarcasm? These are not uncommon threads and at some point maybe the staff should consider this suggestion because it seems like the community would like to have features where they can ignore threads or even entire sections. Using myself as an example, I am not interested in the Xbox section. I have no plans on buying one or modding one, thus that section is pointless for me. I won't mind completely hiding the section since it has no value to me as a user. Can I just scroll past this section? Yes. Do I currently just scroll past this section? Yes. Do I see value in it being there for me? Not really. I should have the option to remove it since it's not something I focus on. Personally, I wouldn't mind just having the forums that I do focus on to remove some of the clutter that I am not using. The Temp already meets us in the middle with the ability to remove these sections from the "Recent Contents," so I fail to see why they can't go further with that and why they always feel the need to dismiss anyone suggesting that they do.

 

[jeffyTheHomebrewer]

an "ignore subforum/category" option would be helpful too, so i can stop seeing stuff from the politics section constantly show up in the recent feed

This! And crypto bullshit.

 

[GeekyGuy]

Self control is not a virtue for everyone, I apologise for the foolish assumption when I made that suggestion.

No need for insults.

For me -- and I'm guessing for most other folks liking and commenting in this thread -- it's more a matter of entering a forum to see a thread title that perhaps mentions some type of horror/racist/phobic connotation that is hard to see every time you enter said forum.

And at the same time, I'm guess most of us don't want to censor anyone. Offering an "ignore thread" option seems like a pretty reasonable mechanic to avoid unnecessary reports or negative energy between forum members. That would cut down work for you, and please the community. Seems like a win/win.

/my two cents worth

 

[godreborn]

did I cause this influx? was it due to the JuanBaNaNa threads? I was just trying to add some jocularity to the otherwise bs of the scenes.

 

[KleinesSinchen]

But updates to this absolutely uninteresting thread will take their place among the updates in new posts. And even reading the title in the list of updates will already be a waste of time.

That is precisely the reason why I'm not against such an idea (and clicked on upvote). The same reason for having uBlock installed: Getting rid of minor annoyances, animations, uninteresting data intense content (not a single day without blocking images in profile messages).
=============

However, the demand for filtering functions is often connected with some kind of emotional stuff (I avoid the word "drama" as this seems to be used in a negative sense commonly). Keywords like "toxic", "(avoid) conflict", "staff should reconsider" suggest another area of application than just convenience. The type of filtering/blocking I don't like very much: Outsourcing the handling of sociological problems on software. (Which doesn't work the least in my experience)

Using myself as an example, I am not interested in the Xbox section. I have no plans on buying one or modding one, thus that section is pointless for me. I won't mind completely hiding the section since it has no value to me as a user.

This is the different kind of ignoring: The "I don't care" type. It is not the same as:

mentions some type of horror/racist/phobic connotation that is hard to see every time you enter said forum

The latter is the point where I say: Either it is to be tolerated, even if going against the own mindset, or it goes too far, is actually racist/*phobic or whatever intolerable content and has to be deleted, not ignored. Why would I want to look away from that?


I want to emphasize once again: I support this suggestion for convenience. I just doubt this part:

a pretty reasonable mechanic to avoid unnecessary reports or negative energy between forum members

How should the option to click on ignore thread, prevent bad blood between users? Those who let discussions escalate will most likely not use that option.
It is a problem of people being unable to behave. A problem of people being unable to "move on" when seeing stuff contradicting the own opinion. A problem of people being unable to don't take things personally.
They have the option to ignore in brain right now… and they don't. Suddenly they will when having a button for ignoring!?

 

[Chary]

The site is pretty great at letting you customize what you want to see, so this is a pretty sensible option.

 

[JuanMena]

Bumping (and to avoid making another thread on the matter) because it falls in the whole Ignoring function:

How come Ignore won't prevent those you're ignoring from posting on your profile?

And setting the Privacy from: "Can post on profile" from Members Only to People You Follow, won't solve the issue because yes, it also locks everyone else whom you don't want to ignore.
(Follow 500K+ members except those whom you want to ignore?)


Wouldn't be implied that, by ignoring someone, you'll be totally invisible/uncontactable by those you're ignoring?

Also, again, ignore isn't working properly because some are still appearing even though.

 

[godreborn]

Bumping (and to avoid making another thread on the matter) because it falls in the whole Ignoring function:

How come Ignore won't prevent those you're ignoring from posting on your profile?

And setting the Privacy from: "Can post on profile" from Members Only to People You Follow, won't solve the issue because yes, it also locks everyone else whom you don't want to ignore.
(Follow 500K+ members except those whom you want to ignore?)


Wouldn't be implied that, by ignoring someone, you'll be totally invisible/uncontactable by those you're ignoring?

Also, again, ignore isn't working properly because some are still appearing even though.

word of advice, if you don't want to see the thread, don't respond to them. I'm going to put you on my ignore list as well, because I guess our friendship is over.

 

[JuanMena]

word of advice, if you don't want to see the thread, don't respond to them. I'm going to put you on my ignore list as well, because I guess our friendship is over.

Jesus fucking christ, wasn't referring to you.
Just ignored couple more edgy teens but they're still appearing.

Also, I said in profile, not in threads.

 

[The Catboy]

If one really is unable to cope with some content and needs technical help in ignoring: It is still possible to solve this client side. Why wait for somebody else to implement it? Just do it yourself! Not hard to figure out something like this:
gbatemp.net##.node—unread.node--forum.node--depth2.node--id290.node
Gone is the politics section (and to some extent it is possible to do the same with two click with a single thread).

How would I actually go about doing this?