Skip Navigation

"ignore this member's posts" feature?

Travel Forums System Talk "ignore this member's posts" feature?

1. Posted by pfeiffer (Full Member 211 posts) 10y

Is there a way to ignore all forum postings from specific members? If not this would be a very useful feature (equivalent to the old 'kill' file).

-Kevin

--
Kevin Pfeiffer (message footers would also be nice)

2. Posted by Hien (Moderator 3906 posts) 10y

Wow... Only 19 days in TP and you need a killfile already! I wonder who they are.

Killfile is mainly, if not only, used for usenet/newsgroups. Unfortunately, we do not have such function in the forums. As a matter of fact, I have not seen any forums site that has this function.

Just ignore their posts. ;)

The same goes to the footer/signature. We do not have that either. We want to keep the page layout simple and clean. We do not want it filled with artistic/decorative/promotional signatures at the end of every post. Anyway, the poster's name, location, and rank are already on display in the left column. :)

3. Posted by Pardus (Respected Member 2356 posts) 10y

I don't think we need an ignore function, it's easy enough to ignore posts you don't like. I think a 'formal' ignore button would lead to fights and bad feelings between members. If somebody is getting personal and insulting you can always flag it as spam or notify a moderators. That's what they are here for.

As for the footnote, I've seen it on other forums and it always confuses me because some people like to have 5-6 lines of footnote and it looks like it's related to the post.

Just my 2 rupees...

4. Posted by Peter (Admin 5789 posts) 10y

I don't think an ignore function is necessary either. It's pretty easy to ignore posts/members if you don't like them and members who are seriously problematic are usually booted from the site for breaking terms anyway ;)

As for the signatures, this has been discussed before, essentially I think it would be primarily useful for spammers. For that reason I'm against it. And yeah, the pages are much cleaner without that redundant clutter. Sometimes less is more.

5. Posted by Sander (Moderator 4810 posts) 10y

Quoting Hien

As a matter of fact, I have not seen any forums site that has this function.

vBulletin has had an ignore list for years. Not terrily useful, as you still see that the user has posted (it basically replaces each post with the line "this message is hidden because this user is on your ignore list"), but nice enough to not have to scroll past the messages of those people who never say anything useful and have twenty line signatures.

I agree it's not needed here though.

6. Posted by pfeiffer (Full Member 211 posts) 10y

Quoting Hien

The same goes to the footer/signature. We do not have that either. We want to keep the page layout simple and clean. We do not want it filled with artistic/decorative/promotional signatures at the end of every post. Anyway, the poster's name, location, and rank are already on display in the left column. :)

This is not true. The poster's name does _not_ appear in the left column. That would, however, be a reasonable alternative.

-Kevin
--
Kevin Pfeiffer, Berlin

[ Edit: Edited at Oct 7, 2006 3:42 AM by pfeiffer ]

7. Posted by pfeiffer (Full Member 211 posts) 10y

Quoting Peter

As for the signatures, this has been discussed before, essentially I think it would be primarily useful for spammers. For that reason I'm against it. And yeah, the pages are much cleaner without that redundant clutter. Sometimes less is more.

(Sorry that I somehow managed to squeeze two topics into one thread.)

Not providing an automatic signature won't stop someone from spamming. It won't even stop someone from using a signature. It just makes one have to work harder (and wonder why). Someone else mentioned adding the poster's name to the left column; that would be a reasonable alternative, I think, even if it doesn't fulfill all the purposes of a signature line.

-Kevin
--
Kevin Pfeiffer, Berlin

[ Edit: Edited at Oct 7, 2006 3:46 AM by pfeiffer ]

8. Posted by tway (Travel Guru 7273 posts) 10y

Quoting pfeiffer

Someone else mentioned adding the poster's name to the left column; that would be a reasonable alternative, I think, even if it doesn't fulfill all the purposes of a signature line.

I'm a little confused. You mean people's full names, as opposed to their screen names? I actually like the screen names, plus not everyone would be comfortable posting their actual name here. I must say, after 2 or so years on here, there's yet to be a member whose posts I'd want to block. Sure, you disagree with some and find others a little offensive at times, but that's what makes it interesting. Plus, any truly offensive or inappropriate comments are quickly deleted by the moderators - they really do a fantastic job.

And I agree about the signature line - it would just break up the flow of the 'conversation'. Why add the extra fluff?

9. Posted by pfeiffer (Full Member 211 posts) 10y

Quoting tway

I'm a little confused. You mean people's full names, as opposed to their screen names?

No, I mean screen name or "the name by which one wishes to be identified". This might be your full name (as in my case) or it might be a pseudonym. The point is, it is something over which you have control, and for the sake of security it should not be your login -- which is what is presently displayed.

As things are now, potential members should at least be told when registering that the login ID or username which they choose will also become their screen name and that they will be unable to change it later.

Better (and other forums work this way) is to give the user the option of choosing a screen name; one that can later be changed if desired (for more or less privacy, name change, marriage, whatever).

Just my two cents,

-Kevin
--
Kevin Pfeiffer, Berlin

10. Posted by Peter (Admin 5789 posts) 10y

Quoting pfeiffer

No, I mean screen name or "the name by which one wishes to be identified". This might be your full name (as in my case) or it might be a pseudonym. The point is, it is something over which you have control, and for the sake of security it should not be your login -- which is what is presently displayed.

Interesting point about security. There is something to be said for that. I know some other sites use email addresses to log in rather than screen names. It could be an option, but would of course require some very careful consideration on our part due to the disruption to the 'status quo'.

potential members should at least be told .. that they will be unable to change it later.

This isn't true. You can change your username/screenname at any time in your control panel.

Better (and other forums work this way) is to give the user the option of choosing a screen name; one that can later be changed if desired (for more or less privacy, name change, marriage, whatever).

I'm not sure how that differs from the way we do it, apart from the fact that they might not use the screen name for login purposes. Though most forums I take part in actually do use the screen name for to login as well.

Not providing an automatic signature won't stop someone from spamming. It won't even stop someone from using a signature. It just makes one have to work harder (and wonder why).

Working harder may not stop spam, but it does discourage it :)