About 'Ignore'...

[wtmusic]

Apparently the "Ignore" feature is popular here. Some appear to apply it liberally, and lately I've seen a couple of posts where posters are advised to "just use 'ignore'. Your life will improve substantially", "click that little 'ignore' button, and you will be a happier person", etc.

I know I've been put on ignore by some, and I've certainly been tempted to use it myself. But in reading "The Price of Loyalty", Ron Suskind's book primarily about Paul O'Neill's role in the Bush administration, I was struck by how often a similar theme come up:

'The problem, O'Neill felt was that this President's lack of inquisitiveness...meant he didn't know or really care about the position of the US government. This President was starting from scratch on most issues and relying on ideologues like Larry Lindsey, Karl Rove, and, he now feared, he old friend Dick . Not an honest broker in sight."

and:

"The President was clearly signing on to strong ideological positions that had not been fully thought through. But of course, that's the nature of ideology. Thinking it through is the last thing an ideologue wants to do."

This is not intended to imply anyone here is a Republican (ideology is not exclusive to any party). But to relate the idea directly to DU: one poster, who I literally have not once been in agreement with, came up with what was undeniably an excellent, truly illuminating point yesterday. And another poster had criticized O'Neill himself as a 'flake' because he said he would "probably vote for Bush in 2004". The same poster was unaware that O'Neill had served in four presidencies, had turned Alcoa around, was one of the most environmentally aware CEO's of the 90's, was worth $60 million, and was a personal friend of Alan Greenspan. Because of that one statement, the poster had put O'Neill on "ignore".

So I will never put anyone on ignore. Come one, come all. If someone is being obnoxious DU's moderation, which in general has been excellent, has very effective (and often automatic) ways of dealing with them. IMO "ignore" is for those who wish to retreat into their own self-congratulatory hidey hole, and defeats the whole purpose of a discussion board </rant>.

[Cleita]

1. I agree, however, there was a poster here (since banned)

who put up the most inane posts most of the time that I put those posts on ignore so they wouldn't clutter my screen up, but I never put that poster on ignore because there were times s/he had some really thoughtful things to say.

So I ignore the post but not the poster.

[MuseRider]

2. I feel as you do

but last week I used the button and have one person on ignore who never says anything of substance just dishes out abuse that is false and silly. I hated to do it but I can say that as that person continued to respond to others I felt really good not getting all hot about it because I did know there was nothing of substance coming from those threads and after months of pointing out the incorrect points he/she makes nothing had ever changed. There are a few others I would like to ignore but they often say things I need to read so I just try to control myself, so far so good. I agree with you, we need opposing viewpoints to do our job as citizens correctly.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

3. I felt the same way as you until

I looked back over my post history and it became clear that all the really pointless flame wars and temptations to post inappropriately that I was involved in were with the same 5 posters. Reviewing those comments revealed that there were no real disagreements about ideology or truly substantive discussions of any kind. Just sniping, sloganeering, one-line hit-and-run posts. So I ignored those posters and yes, DU is a much better experience now. Occasionally it is disconcerting to see that little ignored post in the thread but every time I'm curious enough to work with the ignore list and find out what it said, I discover it's just more of the same. But if no one's bugging you -- don't ignore 'em.

[Solly Mack]

4. I don't ignore anyone-might miss something worth reading

and I come here to read

[necso]

5. It took very little "chat",

to teach me that "ignore" really improves the discourse. (The chat was not DU chat and I chat very little.)

What one needs to do is to avoid hitting ignore too easily. I have two persons on my list, that seemed to be creating like 1/3 of the threads (almost all "bait topics") one night. Immediately a lot of the hacking disappeared --- it was great.

I have been tempted to put another person or two on the list but have held off, since they (like you say) do have a thoughtful thing or two to say.

[arwalden]

6. What You Described Is A Clever "Scarlet Letter" Device And...

... I've seen others often actively and PUBLICLY encourage others to ignore a specific individual (or individuals). I continually see proud proclamations of how a certain individual is now on "ignore".

"I'm ignoring you so don't bother to reply."
"Take my advice and put SuzyQue123 on ignore."

In my estimation it's the digital equivalent of sticking one's tongue out and poking one's fingers in the ears, and singing "la-la-la-la-la-i-can't-hear-you"... but I digress.

Statements similar to the fictional examples above are clear attempts to publicly label a member as being unworthy of any amount of respect and consideration and as being someone deserving of nothing more than pure contempt and spite.

Even though it's pretty passive-aggressive, it has the same effect as trying to publicly "out" someone as being a stealth-freeper. In both cases, something like that plants the seeds of doubt and poisons the minds of others who may not have already formed an opinion one way or the other.

That's just wrong.

-- Allen

[Kamika]

7. You shouldn't ignore ppl

If you don't like what a person says you shouldn't ignore him / her, you can ignore it in just that thread but who knows in the next thread he/ she might say something brilliant.


I will admit however that I use the hide thread button ALOT

[shanti]

8. well, i'm one that uses the ignore feature a lot

and never use the hide thread feature. the topic will interest me, but when the usual suspects come onto it with their snipes and jabs, it puts a blight on it. they usually say the same ol thing the time, so i'm not interested in anything further they have to say. MOST of them will STAY on ignore until the primaries are over. i go back to the list every so often and often find that there are some that were tombstoned after i placed them on ignore, so i feel justified in doing so.

works for me...YMMV

[Intelsucks]

9. "Thread hide" is better than "ignore", especially in the lounge.

I can see using the ignore funtion in GD or GD2004, but to do it in the lounge would be just wrong.

I do not have a single individual on ignore, and probably never will. You never know, they might tell the funniest joke you've ever heard right after you put them on ignore.

[Skittles]

10. I have several posters on ignore

a chickenshit hunter and a few fly-under-the-radar trolls.

[Buns_of_Fire]

11. Never have, never will

You see, I just KNOW that if I ever do, the ignoree will find out about it some way, get pissed, track me down, and put a weasel in my shorts.

But I'm not paranoid, no sir!