Over the last few weeks we've been steadily rolling out a suite of new features to our forums, which have (from a development point of view) stayed fairly static for several years. We're glad to see our community making use of those features launched so far (bookmarking, keyboard shortcuts and most importantly enhanced message formatting). Today I'd like to introduce about our latest new feature; the ignore list.
Ignore list
This is a piece of functionality which is regularly requested and has become a standard part of other community discussion systems. Ignore lists allow you to build a list of other members whose posts you'd rather ignore (skip over, shuffle out of view). We're hopeful that it cut down on the number of repeat 'A' complaining about 'B' reports, repeated arguments between the same parties and overall improve the signal to noise ratio.
In design, as with almost all features on dpreview, we concentrated on making it as easy easy to use as possible. If you want to ignore (or de-ignore) someone all you have to do is click the checkbox beside their name when reading one of their posts (either in threaded or flat view read modes, you have to be logged in).
Your preference is recorded and then two things change. Firstly in the forum view any threads started by users on your ignore list are automatically shuffled to the bottom of the page, and shown in grey, this doesn't mean you can't still read them (by design we didn't want something that created any kind of solid wall between our users) but that they will simply be very clearly indicated and shuffled out of your view. You can see that in action below (just as a test, of course I'd not normally ignore these people ;) )
The second thing happens when you're reading a message: in threaded view we simply indicated messages which have been posted by people on your ignore list in grey and the 'next / previous' buttons will skip over these messages (again, you can still read them if you wish).
In flat view messages by people on your ignore list are simply hidden, again you can read them by clicking on the HIDE / SHOW button.
Lastly we're working on a new tab for your profile page which will allow you to see a list of all people you have ignored in one place, and give you the opportunity to de-ignore should you wish.
Good idea.
While I might prefer a total hiding to calm my blood pressure, your way is probably more workable in reality.
But.
Why blur the name of the exemplarily blocked user in your pictures, if it is very easy to find the post and see whom who blocked?
Posted by: JR | Jul 3, 2009 1:17:06 PM
I really think this idea would be more advantageous if the listed ignored member could not respond at all to that member. If you take away the members ability to respond in the first place, the disagreements and arguments would not exist.
Since it is obvious in programming that ignored members turn GRAY, why not have those members unable to respond instead? It could easily work both ways also if both parties list each other in their ignored list.
Posted by: Conrad Birdie | Jul 4, 2009 4:51:45 AM
One other thing. If you have a real bad member that numerous people list to ignore and that member can NOT respond to any of those members, then the problem will eventually go away, because the ignored member will give up since he/she can't post anymore since everyone has ignored them.
Moderation then becomes unnecessary since the members themselves control who they will listen too.
Posted by: Conrad Birdie | Jul 4, 2009 4:55:36 AM
Agree with Conrad above. This would be more effective if you also added or replaced it with a "Block User" function.
That would keep things more civil in troll-infested threads.
Posted by: DP User | Jul 4, 2009 3:34:16 PM
I think a 'block user' function should be implemented. It would come into effect in two ways.
#1 - If you are the originator of a thread this person cannot reply to any posts.
#2 - If you respond in a thread the blocked party cannot reply to your post.
This would cut down on lots of flaming.
Posted by: CW | Jul 4, 2009 7:34:25 PM
Just wondering if a person being on the 'ignore list' would be able to find out if they are being put on that list other than not being responded to. ?
Posted by: William Carson | Jul 4, 2009 8:46:02 PM
With the inclusion of personalised thumbnails, would now be an appropriate time to ban extended "signatures", lists of equipment and websites, "twee" mottoes, etc., etc?
Posted by: CFH | Jul 5, 2009 1:57:18 AM
Ignoring someone through programming is a step towards automation of the rules. Here is another automated rule enforcer that could be implemented: limit embedding only one photo per post - except for the forum gallery.
Posted by: Michael_J | Jul 6, 2009 12:49:56 AM
Here's a thought on the blocking idea. If you make it so members can block each other - then the moderators should also be able to block two members from responding to each other... right? That would stop stalkers, harassers, flamers, etc., AND it would also stop retaliation from the attacked. It would force the offender to "ignore" their prey. Maybe moderator controlled blocking would be a good place to start.
Posted by: Michael_J | Jul 6, 2009 1:29:31 AM
The problem with 'blocking' member from being able to reply is a pretty harsh form of prior restraint or in other words censoring.
While one member might not like a certain person to reply to his/her messages, everyone else who is reading the discussion has no problem with it. Giving a single person the power to exclude another member from a discussion is a little too much power IMHO.
I hope the moderators here will keep an eye on hoe many members 'ignore' a single person here and act based on that. If 20 people put the same single person on the ignore list chances are good that person is talking though his behind a lot :)
Posted by: David | Jul 6, 2009 7:53:55 AM
It's not censoring, it's more like a restraining order. The blocked persons would freely post to anyone else and on any forum of their choosing... just not to each other.
No single person would have the power to exclude another from a discussion - they simple would not be able to post directly to each other. The ignore list would remain unchanged and perhaps be more effective with the addition of blocking.
This way, there would be no loss of content in a thread. Blocking could be reversible as ignoring is now.
Posted by: Michael_J | Jul 7, 2009 12:44:43 PM
An after thought.
People could still do flame baiting posts to their nemesis indirectly, but those would be grayed out and easier to ignore. If it persists, then the old ways would still be there for back up - complain and ban.
Posted by: Michael_J | Jul 7, 2009 12:54:54 PM
Now that you have a clear indication of when threads and posts contain photographs it's easy for those who hate photographs to avoid them
The one photo per post idea of Michael J is unnecessary.
Posted by: GP | Jul 16, 2009 3:46:40 PM
I agree with GP, sort of.
You now have a choice to view ONLY threads (started) with images in them - or - ONLY threads (started) with NO images in them!! How cool is THAT?!
Of course, the rule of not posting numerous images per post is still in effect. \;-)
Posted by: Michael_J | Jul 23, 2009 3:02:53 AM
I was just surfing and found your blog. It really impressed me and I have bookmarked it. Keep posting as I am gonna come everyday for reading.
Posted by: freisprechanlagen | Oct 14, 2009 11:03:14 AM