Ignore List

[scfr]

If there are members of these forums whose posts you would prefer not to read, Saving Advice has an option to add members to a personalized "Ignore List." Here is how:

• Click on "Control Panel"
• Under "Settings and Options" click on "Edit Ignore List"
• Type in the member's name where instructed, and then click "Okay"

[StormRichards]

I would consider using this option if the result is that you don't even know there is a post by that member. However, that is not the result. Instead you get:

This message is hidden because scfr is on your ignore list.

I suppose to some that still has value but I would rather not know someone I am ignoring is even posting.

Also, I don't think it works if that person is quoted either. And the #1 person I would love to ignore gets quoted often.

[rennigade]

I would consider using this option if the result is that you don't even know there is a post by that member. However, that is not the result. Instead you get:

This message is hidden because scfr is on your ignore list.

I suppose to some that still has value but I would rather not know someone I am ignoring is even posting.

Also, I don't think it works if that person is quoted either. And the #1 person I would love to ignore gets quoted often.

Agreed. I wish all posts by users on the ignore list vanish period. If someone quotes them I can live with it...but I would rather not see the "this message is hidden" message.

[scfr]

Agreed. I wish all posts by users on the ignore list vanish period. If someone quotes them I can live with it...but I would rather not see the "this message is hidden" message.

I agree. I wonder if this is something that James could change?
But even if it's not perfect, I still appreciate the option to use the Ignore List.

[bjl584]

I agree. I wonder if this is something that James could change?
But even if it's not perfect, I still appreciate the option to use the Ignore List.

I can look at the mechanics of the forum and see what options exist, but the forums are scheduled to be updated soon anyway, so it may be best to wait until the update is complete.

[disneysteve]

Here's my 2 cents on the matter.

If someone is posting stuff that is objectionable enough to make others have to put them on Ignore status, there's a problem with that poster that needs to be dealt with.

[StormRichards]

Here's my 2 cents on the matter.

If someone is posting stuff that is objectionable enough to make others have to put them on Ignore status, there's a problem with that poster that needs to be dealt with.

I certainly agree that might be a possibility

However, there are a lot of personality conflicts on this site by members who have something to contribute but certain people/topics get them riled up. I am admittedly one of those members, but I am certainly not alone.

I don't recall what site(s), but I know some have moderator capability to put members on mutual ignore. I suspect that is a feature that any moderator would love to have as an option.

[james.hendrickson]

That is correct - we should have a forums upgrade the first week in January.

[StormRichards]

That is correct - we should have a forums upgrade the first week in January.

January 2018?

Or is this upgrade behind schedule?

[james.hendrickson]

Ugh - sorry. I mean the first week in February. That's what I get for multitasking.

[scfr]

Here's my 2 cents on the matter.

If someone is posting stuff that is objectionable enough to make others have to put them on Ignore status, there's a problem with that poster that needs to be dealt with.

Not necessarily. I might choose to put someone on my Ignore List just because I'd rather do that than choose to just stay away from SA.

[disneysteve]

Not necessarily. I might choose to put someone on my Ignore List just because I'd rather do that than choose to just stay away from SA.

I'm very active on another site. A few months ago, there was a new poster who was really obnoxious and posting all kinds of negative garbage that was getting many of us upset and angry. But he wasn't technically breaking any site rules so the moderators said they wouldn't ban him despite constant reports from many of us about his posts. We kept being told to put him on ignore. We all felt that was just supporting his bad behavior.

The end result was that his posts ultimately crossed the line and he got banned, but by the time that had happened, probably 20-30 of the regulars had dropped off, most of whom still haven't come back. We actually started a private group chat and we post in that daily but very, very little to the open boards because we feel the moderators and administrators simply took the wrong side in that debate and backed the wrong person. I wouldn't want to see that happen here.

[StormRichards]

I'm very active on another site. A few months ago, there was a new poster who was really obnoxious and posting all kinds of negative garbage that was getting many of us upset and angry. But he wasn't technically breaking any site rules so the moderators said they wouldn't ban him despite constant reports from many of us about his posts. We kept being told to put him on ignore. We all felt that was just supporting his bad behavior.

The end result was that his posts ultimately crossed the line and he got banned, but by the time that had happened, probably 20-30 of the regulars had dropped off, most of whom still haven't come back. We actually started a private group chat and we post in that daily but very, very little to the open boards because we feel the moderators and administrators simply took the wrong side in that debate and backed the wrong person. I wouldn't want to see that happen here.

I have seen the same type of thing happen elsewhere and totally understand the frustration. But I am not sure your desired ban is the right answer either. In that type of scenario, someone having different political beliefs than the majority could easily get targeted. Honestly, most boards I belong to don't even allow political discussions because of the drama they cause.

I have been on sites that have an unmoderated section for people to discuss whatever pretty much (some exceptions) what they want. They enforce rules strictly in the main forum and only deal with extreme issues in the other forum. People that are easily offended stay away from the other forum.

[StormRichards]

I have seen the same type of thing happen elsewhere and totally understand the frustration. But I am not sure your desired ban is the right answer either. In that type of scenario, someone having different political beliefs than the majority could easily get targeted. Honestly, most boards I belong to don't even allow political discussions because of the drama they cause.

I have been on sites that have an unmoderated section for people to discuss whatever pretty much (some exceptions) what they want. They enforce rules strictly in the main forum and only deal with extreme issues in the other forum. People that are easily offended stay away from the other forum.

The recent activity in the Post Election thread has me coming back to this post. I don't share the opinion regarding the President as the many of Anti-Trump members here. There have been several posts that I have wanted to respond to, but I recently received a warning for arguing. Pretty much any political thread on the internet ends up being one big argument.

As long as it doesn't become personal, I don't view that as a bad thing. However, to people browsing the thread certainly might be turned off by it and report a post or two. Or even worse, someone with an opposing view might report posts out of spite, bitterness, etc. etc.

For that reason, I believe having an unmoderated section is a good reason. I have been reading a bunch of biased rhetoric on that thread, but out of fear of getting banned I can't respond with my point of view. Doesn't feel like a level playing field as far as that goes.

[rennigade]

For that reason, I believe having an unmoderated section is a good reason. I have been reading a bunch of biased rhetoric on that thread, but out of fear of getting banned I can't respond with my point of view. Doesn't feel like a level playing field as far as that goes.

Yeah there should be a section here where all political stuff should be discussed. Probably wouldnt be a bad idea to keep any form of politics out of all forum sections period. Anything political needs to go in X section. They pretty much have a zero tolerance over at slickdeals (they have podium section,) bogleheads and early-retirement.org. At least over at SD there is a section to discuss politics.