-
This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
When a person we have ignored replies to our post, could the system not create a notification?
- Thread starter Craig234
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2014
- Messages
- 29,080
- Reaction score
- 9,686
- Location
- Florida The Armband State
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
No.
I don't ignore any more. Haven't ignored for most of this year if not all of it. In certain highly specific and rare instances ignoring can be a useless function that is self defeating. I refer to personal one-on-one campaigning long term initiated by one single person against another single individual person. That is, personal campaigning over the long term, as in forever.
Ignoring literally and completely means the perp gets to run freely and in the absolute at his own will, for his own purposes and without any control, limitation, restriction, answer, reply; response. And indefinitely besides. One sees the person's stuff enough times and it becomes true to some who are susceptible to repetition as the technique.
Moreover when we're talking a thousand-plus unanswered posts over several years, we're talking about a determined campaign and campaigner. We're talking thousands of post actually, weekly if not daily, to include successive posts to a page of a given thread. The person will stop at nothing and say anything which does need to be checked and countered some of the time at least. As it is, it's between the two posters only.
My only exception occurs when a poster is a flat out nutcase so I do ignore him -- even then however some certain nutcases can be fun to keep an eye out for. Conversely, when a poster is long term campaigning one-on-one, I read him all the time. I don't mind at all saying I read one guy all the time. After all, he's free to roam, and he's free to roam and post in the absolute, indefinitely, forever. I reply to maybe two or three posts in ten of 'em. I reply to the small handful of posts that are particularly absurd or that simply need putting down. That's because over time the effect of ignoring is to favor the initiator.
So the long term and unlimited nature of the uniquely one-on-one campaign demands some responses sometimes to some things. One such situation is when the campaigner leads off a page with his stuff -- that almost always impels a response of some kind. Compels perhaps when it occurs a lot over a long term, even if the positioning at the top of the page may be random or determined by the factors of bandwith and the like.
So no, in a unique instance -- that is, long term personal campaigning, one person pursuing another being the number one -- ignoring in the absolute is a fool's option. The long term advantage always goes to the initiator rather than to the person who might choose to ignore. The person ignoring has the disadvantage. I have said this for years here. To no avail however. So the beat and the beater go on and that is just fact. Meanwhile and throughout the inept remain the inept.
I don't ignore any more. Haven't ignored for most of this year if not all of it. In certain highly specific and rare instances ignoring can be a useless function that is self defeating. I refer to personal one-on-one campaigning long term initiated by one single person against another single individual person. That is, personal campaigning over the long term, as in forever.
Ignoring literally and completely means the perp gets to run freely and in the absolute at his own will, for his own purposes and without any control, limitation, restriction, answer, reply; response. And indefinitely besides. One sees the person's stuff enough times and it becomes true to some who are susceptible to repetition as the technique.
Moreover when we're talking a thousand-plus unanswered posts over several years, we're talking about a determined campaign and campaigner. We're talking thousands of post actually, weekly if not daily, to include successive posts to a page of a given thread. The person will stop at nothing and say anything which does need to be checked and countered some of the time at least. As it is, it's between the two posters only.
My only exception occurs when a poster is a flat out nutcase so I do ignore him -- even then however some certain nutcases can be fun to keep an eye out for. Conversely, when a poster is long term campaigning one-on-one, I read him all the time. I don't mind at all saying I read one guy all the time. After all, he's free to roam, and he's free to roam and post in the absolute, indefinitely, forever. I reply to maybe two or three posts in ten of 'em. I reply to the small handful of posts that are particularly absurd or that simply need putting down. That's because over time the effect of ignoring is to favor the initiator.
So the long term and unlimited nature of the uniquely one-on-one campaign demands some responses sometimes to some things. One such situation is when the campaigner leads off a page with his stuff -- that almost always impels a response of some kind. Compels perhaps when it occurs a lot over a long term, even if the positioning at the top of the page may be random or determined by the factors of bandwith and the like.
So no, in a unique instance -- that is, long term personal campaigning, one person pursuing another being the number one -- ignoring in the absolute is a fool's option. The long term advantage always goes to the initiator rather than to the person who might choose to ignore. The person ignoring has the disadvantage. I have said this for years here. To no avail however. So the beat and the beater go on and that is just fact. Meanwhile and throughout the inept remain the inept.
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2011
- Messages
- 38,257
- Reaction score
- 44,189
- Location
- Atlanta
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
The way vBulletin designed this, the only thing an Ignore Lists does it hide from you messages those posters made while you read a thread. That is it. What they do not do is prevent those users from being able to read your posts and even reply to them, meaning if you have notifications set up they will still be triggered as that event is based on that action.
There are "mods" that get around this but they are generally problematic, collide with other more reasonable mods most that use this version of vBulletin run with, and overall can be painful for moderators and administrators to have to deal with.
This one you may have to deal with as a minor inconvenience.
- Status