KCRag Forum

To be fair to everyone, I'd like to see a policy something like any member who is ignored by 5 or more members will be banned.

That said, we are all (most of use) grown up adults that should be able to monitor ourselves.

KCKev wrote: To be fair to everyone, I'd like to see a policy something like any member who is ignored by 5 or more members will be banned.

That said, we are all (most of use) grown up adults that should be able to monitor ourselves.

That's a bit arbitrary; people might be ignored because others don't like their political viewpoint so then we are left with censorship of a particular view according to the whims of a few posters.  As Bahua says, so very few are banned that it's really not a huge issue.  Banning a member should be taken on a case by case basis and used infrequently; and from what I can tell, it has been a case by case decision and it is infrequent.   

Highlander wrote: That's a bit arbitrary; people might be ignored because others don't like their political viewpoint so then we are left with censorship of a particular view according to the whims of a few posters.  As Bahua says, so very few are banned that it's really not a huge issue.  Banning a member should be taken on a case by case basis and used infrequently; and from what I can tell, it has been a case by case decision and it is infrequent.     

If I get one more member ignoring me, then I'd be up for a bannin', by that policy. Of course two of those people ignoring me are the two people we just banned. What a thickened plot it all has been. Once again proving that Teh Internet is Serious Business.

Tosspot wrote: If I get one more member ignoring me, then I'd be up for a bannin', by that policy. Of course two of those people ignoring me are the two people we just banned. What a thickened plot it all has been. Once again proving that Teh Internet is Serious Business.

It's rather unbelievable that you have 4 forumers ignoring you.  They miss out on some good photography not to mention enhancement of their vocabulary. 

Banning people for being ignored by users would make the forum a kind of cyber reality show;  "I'm sorry Toss, but you've been voted off the Rag."  Unecassary for sure and a little too arbitrary. 

Highlander wrote: It's rather unbelievable that you have 4 forumers ignoring you.  They miss out on some good photography not to mention enhancement of their vocabulary.   

Banning people for being ignored by users would make the forum a kind of cyber reality show;  "I'm sorry Toss, but you've been voted off the Rag."   Unecassary for sure and a little too arbitrary. 

Thanks friend!

Highlander wrote: That's a bit arbitrary; people might be ignored because others don't like their political viewpoint so then we are left with censorship of a particular view according to the whims of a few posters.  As Bahua says, so very few are banned that it's really not a huge issue.  Banning a member should be taken on a case by case basis and used infrequently; and from what I can tell, it has been a case by case decision and it is infrequent.     

I see your point. we don't want to be accused of profiling.

We might all ignore each other and everyone would be banned 

Wait then a ban wouldn't be needed !

So I looked and here is what I found.

Users with 1000 or more posts & 5 or more ignores


justin8216

schugg

anniewarbucks

kcmetro

Joemoney

I would miss 2 of those 5 fourmers.  The other 3 can get lost for all I care (and they kind of already have).

AllThingsKC wrote: I would miss 2 of those 5 fourmers.  The other 3 can get lost for all I care (and they kind of already have).

I would agree...although I don't know who you would choose..

Annie is quite the character, but causes NO issues with others.  There's nothing wrong with having someone like that onboard...frankly...I miss having her post more.  It gave us a nice diverse mix of normal people vs architecturally interested people.

Justin is ok some of the time, and KCmetro needs some major improvement inside the sports rooms...but I wouldn't mind missing the lame "My dear friend named Omaha has more Billionaires than a city named New York" arguements.  Some people need to grow up, but then again...without them we would have no use for the word "Troll".

Either way, there's no reason to Ban somebody right off the bat.  They should at least be given a few warnings by way of Temporary Suspensions (Muting/The Quiet Chair), and if they continue to troll after multiple trips to the QC (As was the case with Maitre D) then they should be banned.  This forum is here for a reason, and if you can't respect that then you have no business posting.  We all make the choice when joining to be part of this community, to contribute something meaningful, and if someone thinks otherwise they have no right being here.  Its that simple.

One thing I really enjoy about this forum is the personalities involved.  We all know what MD was about, and I was always entertained by things like his marriage thread being named after him.  Annie is harmless, and seemingly oblivious to people taking shots at her, and its a different personality that we here know.  I'm sure Devin would be on that list if he had an active account (I'm assuming he doesn't currently?) but again, those of us who have been here for a while read his posts and recognize, hey, that's Devin- he can get a little out of control here and there, but he's allright.  Of the people on that list, I really don't know what they have done to be put on ignore (espectially the two who I assume you are talking about) except for being annoying at times.

phxcat wrote: Of the people on that list, I really don't know what they have done to be put on ignore (espectially the two who I assume you are talking about) except for being annoying at times.

Oh, make no mistake...I put no one on ignore.  I think that's a foolish thing to do.  Why ruin you're experience by blocking out differing viewpoints?  We should all be able to adapt and adjust our views if needed, that's something I treasure.  I simply pointed out Annie and justin as examples of differing viewpoints that should be tolerated.

The only time I take issue with anyone is when they are rampantly posting non-sense in every thread, polluting the forum, and are unable to take any sort of constructive criticism when they know they are wrong on something they present as factual.  Everyone should know that da-nile is more than a river in egypt, but apparently that's not the case.

Maybe I can unignore metro now that his partner in crime has been banned.

But I can't help but wonder who will piggyback off of his posts every 2 minutes now. 

bahua wrote: Yeah, Michael was the other. I don't really count all the subsequent accounts he opened as different bans.

i think "kansasfarmboy" may have been banned back in the day.

chrizow wrote: i think "kansasfarmboy" may have been banned back in the day.

I think you're right. I still have a private massage from him that's a doozy.

On topic - kudos to the mods for stepping up.

I still don't know who is ignoring me and it's driving me nuts.

AllThingsKC wrote: I would miss 2 of those 5 fourmers.  The other 3 can get lost for all I care (and they kind of already have).

Which two?  grrrrrr!!  LoL   That's so funny that I would be banned. I know 3 of the people that have me ignored.  I'm not as bad as I used to be and don't post much anymore. I still love to come on here and take a peek.

shinatoo wrote: I still don't know who is ignoring me and it's driving me nuts.

Same here.  I can't believe somebody is ignoring me, I can't recall anything I've ever said to infuriate anybody except maybe chef - who doesn't (didn't) ignore anybody.

You guys can all calm down about this. it was both Chef's sockpuppets he'd set to ignore people to mess with their minds, plus Maitre D would do something similar by technically ignoring people but still responding to their posts with all the flame-bait he could. Unless their accounts are actually deleted it will continue to show up as ignores in our profiles.

Highlander wrote: It's rather unbelievable that you have 4 forumers ignoring you.

Someone with a slow connection might ignore Tosspot so threads would load faster.  Who knows why "ignore" is used in different cases?

mean wrote:

KCPowercat wrote: sports rooms don't make bad posters.

Given the rampant level of that kind of BS on sports-specific forums, I think your assessment may be incorrect.

On the other forum I moderate, we had a very few hot button issues which we moderate with quite a heavy hand if they stray too far from the board's food focus...politics and religion are the old standbys, but Cubs vs. Sox was right up there in terms of topics judged likely to lead the board from interesting topical conversation to arbitrary nonsense.  (The other hot button argument we would always nip early was Mac vs. PC.)  I think discord sown in one part of a board certainly sprouts fruit in others.

All I am saying is the posters are bad in the first place. The discussion of sports might bring that out but that doesn't mean sports topics are 'bad' topics.