Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New Feature: Ignore Forums
- Thread starter arn
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Sounds like you can put "discussion" in quotes as well.Politics, Religion, Social Issues. Lots of... errm... "passionate" discussion there.
The problem is the quality of the argument in there lately.
Personally, I think you almost always set a good example of what a balanced, adult conversation looks like. A bit of humor often oils the wheels of an impasse. Something many don't "get".
But it's hard work, trying to stay upbeat and chipper in the midst of such determined dysfunction. I admire your tenacity.
I'm reluctant to ignore a whole forum myself. There are always little nuggets among the dross.
That said, I'm finding the new ignore user feature so much better than the old forums. It's just so easy to use and it completely eliminates all traces of the ignored. Even when other members quote them. Brilliant!
Traditionally I only ignored members who were determinedly antisocial. My list was always pretty small.
Lately, I starting to wonder if I should just start ignoring people who repeatedly stray off the topic of a thread. They tend to be lengthy posts with an obvious (irrelevant) agenda and they're not even witty or entertaining. It just wastes time. Thoughts?
Hm. I hear you, and see what you are saying.
In a way, I agree with you, and am somewhat tempted by your approach, sufficiently tempted to think that it might be worth emulating a little. However, if you simply consign all of the posts and posters that one finds obtuse and ignorant and boorish under the safe oblivion of the 'ignore' function, this has the effect of allowing them possession of the airwaves and the threads.
Sometimes, their aim is not to debate something, but, rather, to obliterate the very existence of an alternative perspective. Walking away, and ignoring them, means awarding them possession of the argument. Sometimes, they need to be called out and challenged, although, I'll readily grant that I am not up to doing battle on a daily basis.
It's not something I do lightly, but these are the sort of people I would avoid in real life anyway - so why bother engaging here? Because it's easy? Seems like insufficient justification to me.
They can rule their miserable little threads for all I care. It's not something I need to be associated with. Engaging only seems to energize them.
I agree that for some their goal appears to be generating interference, or channel-jamming. So I change the channel. Leave them with zero audience.
I'm happy to debate opposing views honestly and in good faith, but if the opponent seems totally entrenched, then all I'm getting in return for my effort is a canned sales pitch.
Life's too short to listen to these salesmen all day. It has a corrosive effect on the soul. Too easy to adopt their tricks and wind-up becoming one of them. Perish the thought.
I agree that for some their goal appears to be generating interference, or channel-jamming. So I change the channel. Leave them with zero audience.
I'm happy to debate opposing views honestly and in good faith, but if the opponent seems totally entrenched, then all I'm getting in return for my effort is a canned sales pitch.
Life's too short to listen to these salesmen all day. It has a corrosive effect on the soul. Too easy to adopt their tricks and wind-up becoming one of them. Perish the thought.
To a certain extent, I agree with you and I can see where you are coming from.
When you write about how 'they can rule their miserable little threads' and how, in real life, (outside of a professional setting where you may not have such a choice) you would not willingly choose to associate with these people, in general, I'm in agreement with you.
However, my concern is that in ceding a portion of the public space to them it allows their increasingly splenetic and disagreeable tone (and content) to become the accepted norm for debate on certain issues. And that, in turn, can cause further issues when the mere fact of expressing the existence of alternative perspective can then be a cause for dispute.
Lately? It all went downhill with the introduction of the iPhone as Apple moved into a truly mass-market position.
I'm not usually one to look back with rose-tinted glasses, but when membership was far far smaller and mostly restricted to those using Macs (generally middle to higher income earners weighted towards those in their 30s to 50s), although the topics were just as vociferous, the quality, length, cogency and substance of posts was generally higher. The demographic has changed. I also suspect that back then, with everyone having to type on keyboards as well as having longer attention spans with little other distraction from social networks, this has also changed the nature of online discussions. Personally, I also suspect that the proliferation of methods of rating posts (likes and so forth) has led to a phenomenon of people playing to the gallery.
When it comes to PRSI, if there's one thing that makes me laugh, it's people in this very thread calling for it to be closed when they've been posting in there recently, as well as having a history of getting their arses publicly handed to them in there in combination with posting 'Goodbye Cruel World' posts saying they weren't going to return, only to be back weeks later for more punishment. It's a pattern I've seen from specific personality types time and time again over the years, who, if they can't handle it, want to then remove it for everyone else. It is the sure mark of a childish, bitter loser.
It's a shame you don't have the patience to endure posting in PRSI more, Blue. You almost always have an excellent point to make, and your withering disdain is such a joy to witness.
Almost everything I've ever done and written on MacRumors, including moderating for a period, as well as making a few friends in real life, seen in hindsight, has had a neglible return on investment. In the greater scheme of things, the many hours I used to put in here have counted for very little and in many ways, I regret giving a lot of my personal time keeping Arn's little sandpit as neat and tidy as I could.
The private forums were a daily riot — seen from the inside of a rambunctious peer group — until they put a bunch of straight-laced po-faced trigger-happy prudes in charge which caused dozens of longstanding members to melt away to Twitter back in the day, never to return… and although I read a little now and then, and post when I'm occasionally bored or get driven beyond despair at some idiocy I read, generally speaking, I've got far more interesting and valuable things to do with my time right now than to argue with some socially-maladjusted geeks about political topics they're too lazy, immature or downright stupid to understand.*
*present company excluded, of course
I can understand that. The futility of it all is pretty plain to see. Though I think I've started developing it into a hobby of sorts. Like I've tapped into some primal well buried deep within the blacker recesses of my heart and soul. Nowadays, I find myself arguing with everyone, despite the fact that previously I rarely ever talked about politics.
God help me, I love it so.
Maybe I've missed my calling. Maybe I should've been a lawyer. Mom and dad always said I was an ***hole...
Blue, may I ask you a question?
What was your perception of and how did you handle the seemingly unsolvable contradiction between blind brand fanatism and the otherwise higher than the average IQ level of forum visitors.
So true. I lurked here all through the early iPod years and it was a much saner, more civilized place. There was a much stronger sense of community and purpose that was less tolerant of frivolous nonsense.
It was also well-policed by the members themselves. Set a foot wrong and they would let you know in a firm (but respectful) way. It's one of the reasons I lurked for so long. The thought of inadvertently saying something stupid and the resultant dressing-down, made me hesitant to join.
Nowadays the jackasses are high fiving each other.
I don't know if anybody else has reported this, but I'm experiencing issues with the Ignore Forums feature.
@arn, I second this question. Up until I read this thread, I assumed the Ignore Forums feature was broken because I can still view posts from ignored threads in the Latest Replies section.Or, in my case, just substitute my own mod for blocking forums
[B]@arn[/B], any chance of this working with "Latest Replies" on the main page?
As far as I know, it has never worked there. It only blocks replies from the New Posts and Forum Spy sections.
Indeed, that's what I learned after reading this thread. Before, I assumed it was supposed to block instances of ignored threads in the Latest Replies section as well. That's why I seconded redheeler's question, which asked (as I interpreted it) if there was any chance of this feature being added to the Ignore Forums setting.
I'm not convinced that @-notation notifies the person identified that they've been named, so I'll try a reply.
Please extend the utility of Ignore to the "Latest Replies" on the main forum page. I come to MR to escape the political news of the day and just the thread titles alone are often enough to break a good mood.