Home | Blog | Software | Reviews and Features | Forum | Help | Donate | About us
topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • November 18, 2017, 02:29 AM
  • Proudly celebrating 10 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Last post Author Topic: Forum / Thread Etiquette  (Read 6225 times)

Darwin

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,984
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Forum / Thread Etiquette
« Reply #25 on: January 17, 2011, 07:51 AM »
If I had a dime for every time I completely re-wrote much of my post, sometimes post- um... post.  :huh:

Also, if I had 17 cents for every time I wrote a response and then DIDN'T post because I either (A) figured out halfway through that I wasn't going to come across like I wanted to, (B) what I was writing was not going to further the topic, or (C) my snark gland was particularly over-active that day and I had the good sense to just skip it...  :P
That said, some days I feel great need to express some righteous 'geek rage' and I'm just grateful that the people and atmosphere here are as resilient as they are convivial.

I think much of the general tone of this place can be traced back to when this site was young; Mouser's presence and tact kind of set a mood to the forum that serendipitiously continued as like-minded and -tempered individuals showed up looking for a place to hang out.

Thanks Mouser, nice place you got here!  :Thmbsup: :Thmbsup:

Awesome, Edvard - you've summed my feelings/experiences up perfectly  :Thmbsup:

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,794
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Forum / Thread Etiquette
« Reply #26 on: January 17, 2011, 07:57 AM »

My understanding is that twit filters are a per-user setting, so they wouldn't prevent the 'target' from posting.  It just would make it so that if (for example) I never wanted to read another thing that mouser wrote, I could have the system help me out with that instead of having to avert my eyes.

Since it's a personal setting, I see no particular problem with enabling it (no one can force anyone to read posts anyway).

The reason I thought they weren't a good idea is for more practical reasons than anything else.

What I've seen happen in some forums I'm involved in (where filters are used) is that the person filtering doesn't see all the posts.

Sooner or later what happens is that two separate conversations start to develop because of it. Things get challenged that were already explained, questions are asked that were already answered, etc. because the person who is blocking is missing pieces of the dialog.

This can create a great deal of frustration for the other participants. Usually the person who's doing the blocking ends up feeling they are being treated unfairly when they're eventually told: "Well, if you could be bothered to read the entire thread before you post something..."

So that's why I feel it's not a generally good idea.

I'm all for allowing someone to block somebody from PMing or otherwise messaging them. Because messages are private conversations. But a forum is a public one. And in order for a public conversation to be conducted effectively, all the participants need to be on the exact same page.

Works much the same way in the non-digital world. At a social gathering, nobody expects us to have a conversation with someone we don't really want to talk to. But we are expected to act politely and civilly towards them while we're there. And when they're rude, not to respond in the same manner. It's the responsibility of the hosts to deal with the chronically unruly and impolite.

Just my  :two:

 :)

« Last Edit: January 17, 2011, 08:01 AM by 40hz »

wraith808

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 8,991
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Forum / Thread Etiquette
« Reply #27 on: January 17, 2011, 08:32 AM »
^ Very well said!  I'd give you a cookie if I could. :)

tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,884
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Forum / Thread Etiquette
« Reply #28 on: January 17, 2011, 08:56 AM »
The reason I thought they weren't a good idea is for more practical reasons than anything else.

What I've seen happen in some forums I'm involved in (where filters are used) is that the person filtering doesn't see all the posts.

Yeah, I think it could make threads very stilted

mahesh2k

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 1,417
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Forum / Thread Etiquette
« Reply #29 on: January 17, 2011, 10:37 AM »
It's Manchester United, not MANU. Now start the fight.   >:(

rjbull

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 2,943
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Forum / Thread Etiquette
« Reply #30 on: January 17, 2011, 01:37 PM »
It's Manchester United, not MANU. Now start the fight.   >:(
Not to worry, I don't do footy  :)
http://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=25232.25
www.donationcoder.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2017-47
53387
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:ZRTBAAIASK7T4ILNQM676ZBZWMKFENWV
<urn:uuid:608fae59-b2ee-4d27-ada0-c1413f1974c7>
2017-11-18T08:30:52Z
67.228.199.106
application/xhtml+xml
sha1:FFCPRO6TZMGMWCE7X7D2ZNQMZBJHJZN6
<urn:uuid:6ff857f6-c933-44fe-8b0a-ebe80fac381f>
http://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=25232.25
length
response
<urn:uuid:d2109add-0175-423d-b89b-7a610f6cf7cf>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-79-203-83.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2017-47
operator: Common Crawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for November 2017
publisher: Common Crawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf