A New Kind of Ignore Function

[Boojatta]

The basic problem with ignore of threads is that one ignores all threads started by a given DU member based on who created the Original Post of the thread rather than based on what was actually written.

This suggests that DU members ought to have the opportunity to create their own "trusted adviser" lists. If one of your trusted advisers has chosen to evaluate a given thread, then that rating would contribute to the generation of an automatic rating that you will see if you are signed in. To evaluate a given thread, one would not give an overall good/bad evaluation. Instead, one would give a round table of ratings of different aspects of the quality of the thread, dimensions that would be equally important, unless you decide otherwise.

You would choose the formula that would determine, based on some combination of the evaluations given by your trusted advisers, what overall rating it receives. You would also decide on the minimum rating needed. An unrated thread would not be considered as having a low rating, unless you decide to use settings that cause an unrated thread to be considered low-rated for you.

Notice that in a sense this is the opposite of ignore, except that it has nothing to do with the words posted by a DU member and everything to do with the DU member's evaluations of threads. Instead of always trying to decide whether or not to add a DU member to your ignore list, you will try to decide whether or not to add a DU member to your trusted adviser list. Instead of blocking out the bad, you will be looking for the good.

[YOY]

1. Better idea yet. Have the DLCers get their own site and own party

You'll find civility returning in spades!

Oh wait. They already have one and it's not the democratic party.

[LostinVA]

3. I'm a Hillary supporter and I'm not a DLCer

I'm actually a Democratic Socialist.

[YOY]

6. Yes, and we love you for it.

Would that the same could be said for many supporters of both Democratic candidates...

[bryant69]

4. Or alternative we could get rid of all the self righteous "more leftist than thou" fucks who ruin

this board.

Or, like adults, we could learn to live with each other.

Nah, fuck that. Bring on the purge.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[YOY]

7. The purge already happened

The moderately left got screwed and called "ultra-left" by right leaning centrists. They proceeded to justify the Republican's position of just a smidgen to the left of Hitler as merely "the right".

e.g. of why this seems to be true: This would be why when you point out the possibility of the implementation of a functional American social health care system like say...anywhere else in the civilized world you get called a communist by people who don't even know what a communist is let alone the positive ramifications of having such a system.

I'm sorry, but are you implying am a "more leftist than thou" fuck or is that just a general observation of some folks opinions?

If so exactly how am I "more leftist than thou"?

[SidDithers]

8. Good post...

:applause:

Sid

[Boojatta]

9. Bring on the trusted advisers lists or bring on the purge? Which one?

[bryant69]

14. Purge! n/t

[LanternWaste]

16. Coffee... meet monitor screen.

Coffee... meet monitor screen.

(too funny)

[usrbs]

11. I'm not a DLCer but why do you want an echo chamber?

I too am to the left of both candidates (I want us to become Sweden without the depression and bad weather, or at least France), and I agree - without HRC supporters it will certainly be more civil, but is that really what you want.

And believe me, the venom is just as bad or even worse from the other side.

[YOY]

12. Read post 6

n/t

[FreakinDJ]

2. See no evil ....

[crikkett]

5. ...for those of us too curious to handle the current ignore function?

I say leave it be.

Either you ignore someone or you don't; if you can't handle that then it's your own problem with limits that you need to grow out of.

I for one am lucky and grateful for the ignore function granted us here at DU. Most forums don't have one.

[Boojatta]

10. "Either you ignore someone or you don't"

Are you a professor of philosophy or something?

[northzax]

13. it's for people who want others to do all the heavy lifting for them

I agree, if you get so annoyed by someone that you put them on ignore, that means you don't get to read them anymore. if your skin is really that thin, then you shouldn't be seeing them (full disclosure, I have had one person on ignore since ignore became a feature, and that was at the insistence of the moderators that we ignore each other. that person is no longer with us) And this idea would simply create parallel groups of like-thinking people, if all you ever saw was what people you already agree with see, then why bother with a discussion board?

attention Obama people: those who ignore any Hillary supporter, why not go to an Obama board, if that's all you want?

attention Hillary people: those who ignore any Obama supporter, why not go to an Hillary board, if that's all you want?

people take all this message board stuff so gosh darned seriouslike. this is all a game, and everyone should remember that. At the end of the day, we are all on the same side (I hope) but spending your time telling someone else that they are not a 'real democrat' because they don't support your candidate is just, well, juvenile. it can be fun, but it's juvenile, and dare I say, divisive?

[Boojatta]

15. I want to be a trusted adviser for others. I also want to make my own list of trusted advisers.

[Boojatta]

17. Kick

[cynatnite]

18. I have never put a DUer on ignore...

Have never felt the need.

Hiding threads...yes, I do that on occasion for those threads that are too gruesome for my tastes...such as ones concerning the harming of children or ones that hurt my brain like spanking or circumcision. Fortunately, they are rare.

I like how DU is setup as it is. Works for me. :)

[Boojatta]

19. Kick