Blocking forum users.

[Vavume.8065]

@Cyrin.1035 said:You'd probably get a warning or not responded to because of your invalid report reason.

Spam is a valid reason.

@Offair.2563 said:Anet should put restrictions on how many polls one account can start. Like 1-2 per weeks tops

Agreed.

[Illurim.6059]

Solutions to this huge problem (heavy sarcasm):

1. Don't read the post (I've skipped most of the people wanting a block and their reasoning because it literally felt like I was reading the complaints of 5 year old children about story time not being their favourite story).
2. Stuck reading because you can't control yourself? Use the 'x' in your browser window and do something else.
3. Don't come to the forums, take a break for a few days.
4. Grow up.

I think all those solutions are reasonable.

[Chorne.8195]

Whoa... calm down, Mrs. Passive-Aggressive. ;) Your polls are creating many interesting discussions, ( At least some of the older ones, a couple newer ones are more along the lines of "Who would survive against a tsunami, Pale Tree or Jenna," ) but the sheer number of them is a bit irritating to some people.The solution is to limit the amount of polls you can make in a period of time, I agree with Offair on that point. That way the discussions can still take place, and the people irritated by a high number of polls will not be so.

On a lighter note, this thread keeps reminding me of this:

[Gaile Gray.6029]

@Offair.2563 said:Anet should put restrictions on how many polls one account can start. Like 1-2 per weeks tops so it wont get flooded with stupid polls like if you have your scythe yet or not.

It's an interesting idea. We have an expectation that someone will not post multiple polls, but that they will want to / should focus on one at a time. We've expressed that to people who have posted multiples, so they're aware of what we set as an expectation. I don't really want to start handing out infractions about this, but I also believe that the forums should not be too heavily biased in the form of polls -- which engender less conversation -- and that they host far more discussions that surveys.

That said, I'll see how things settle over the next period of time to determine if we need to formalize a limitation on polls by the same author. I intend to review the Forums Code of Conduct after the New Year to determine if there's anything we need to add, detail, or explain more clearly.

[Illurim.6059]

It's a forum. People don't have the right to restrict the posts of others because they find them objectionable or "too much to deal with". They do, absolutely, have the right to pass them over and move to posts they find more interesting though. That's what adults do.

[Gaile Gray.6029]

This topic has arisen three times in recent weeks. Please read this post for information on blocking: https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/19690/suggestion-being-able-to-block-people-on-the-forums

[Nate Anabe.6091]

@Gaile Gray.6029 said:

It's an interesting idea. We have an expectation that someone will not post multiple polls, but that they will want to / should focus on one at a time. We've expressed that to people who have posted multiples, so they're aware of what we set as an expectation. I don't really want to start handing out infractions about this, but I also believe that the forums should not be too heavily biased in the form of polls -- which engender less conversation -- and that they host far more discussions that surveys.

That said, I'll see how things settle over the next period of time to determine if we need to formalize a limitation on polls by the same author. I intend to review the Forums Code of Conduct after the New Year to determine if there's anything we need to add, detail, or explain more clearly.

Would it be possible to create a sub group for polls? Where they are all grouped together under one topic.

[Shirlias.8104]

@"Illurim.6059" said:It's a forum. People don't have the right to restrict the posts of others because they find them objectionable or "too much to deal with". They do, absolutely, have the right to pass them over and move to posts they find more interesting though. That's what adults do.

Actually, as a forum, the user should be able to move and read the way he wants.If this would mean to block some users, then it's by his own choice.

The more options, the better ( and i mean useful ones, not things like thumbs up/down or helpful, which are not necessarily useful ).

[artemis.6781]

Now that's an interesting idea!

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

I did notice there weren't as many polls on the front page. Maybe they dropped off, already?

[Illurim.6059]

@Shirlias.8104 said:

@"Illurim.6059" said:It's a forum. People don't have the right to restrict the posts of others because they find them objectionable or "too much to deal with". They do, absolutely, have the right to pass them over and move to posts they find more interesting though. That's what adults do.

Actually, as a forum, the user should be able to move and read the way he wants.If this would mean to block some users, then it's by his own choice.

The more options, the better ( and i mean useful ones, not things like thumbs up/down or helpful, which are not necessarily useful ).

Normal human processes of reading what you want and ignoring what you don't want applies. Deciding that your need to read what you want means blocking others is juvenile. Simply don't read it, you have that right and that capability built into your human DNA. Use it.

[Shirlias.8104]

@Illurim.6059 said:

@Shirlias.8104 said:

@Illurim.6059 said:It's a forum. People don't have the right to restrict the posts of others because they find them objectionable or "too much to deal with". They do, absolutely, have the right to pass them over and move to posts they find more interesting though. That's what adults do.

Actually, as a forum, the user should be able to move and read the way he wants.If this would mean to block some users, then it's by his own choice.

The more options, the better ( and i mean useful ones, not things like thumbs up/down or helpful, which are not necessarily useful ).

Normal human processes of reading what you want and ignoring what you don't want applies. Deciding that your need to read what you want means blocking others is juvenile. Simply don't read it, you have that right and that capability built into your human DNA. Use it.

You have to sit down for a while and realize that if a feature like that could cause you some issues, then the issue it's on you only ( and since you like being an Adult, you should try to understand that force the others to accept your own version by forbidding an extra feature it's simply selfish, but as always been there, seen that ).

Not to say many forums do have the possibility to set up your own account with preferences, in order to read the way ypu want.

That said, ANET is not going to introduce a feature like that, so it will only remain a discussion with a definite outcome.

[Illurim.6059]

@Shirlias.8104 said:

@Illurim.6059 said:

@Shirlias.8104 said:

@Illurim.6059 said:It's a forum. People don't have the right to restrict the posts of others because they find them objectionable or "too much to deal with". They do, absolutely, have the right to pass them over and move to posts they find more interesting though. That's what adults do.

Actually, as a forum, the user should be able to move and read the way he wants.If this would mean to block some users, then it's by his own choice.

The more options, the better ( and i mean useful ones, not things like thumbs up/down or helpful, which are not necessarily useful ).

Normal human processes of reading what you want and ignoring what you don't want applies. Deciding that your need to read what you want means blocking others is juvenile. Simply don't read it, you have that right and that capability built into your human DNA. Use it.

You have to sit down for a while and realize that if a feature like that could cause you some issues, then the issue it's on you only ( and since you like being an Adult, you should try to understand that force the others to accept your own version by forbidding an extra feature it's simply selfish, but as always been there, seen that ).

Not to say many forums do have the possibility to set up your own account with preferences, in order to read the way ypu want.

A blocking feature wouldn't cause me issues, no need to assume things on my behalf to set up your straw man argument.

I'm not forcing anyone to do anything. I'm saying to people who want a block feature that you already have it - it's in YOU. If you choose not to exercise self-control by skipping posts you don't like, that's entirely up to you. There's no selfishness on my part, however much you try to paint me with that brush because it suits your argument to do so. I'm just a person saying to you, someone who wants a block feature, you can block already, but you're choosing not to do so. It's that fact that seems juvenile to me, and your responses haven't improved my assessment.

[Lambent.6375]

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:I did notice there weren't as many polls on the front page. Maybe they dropped off, already?

I think they got deleted.

[Cragga the Eighty Third.60]

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:I did notice there weren't as many polls on the front page. Maybe they dropped off, already?

No. I noticed they are gone, too, but if you search for them, they are still available. They must have been hidden while the moderators decide what to do.For what it's worth, I enjoy the polls and don't find them more spammy than the constant threads complaining about RNG, balance, how Anet is destroying the game, or new ways Anet should be charging us more money.

By the way, pretty much every poll thread on this forum has at least one post whining about the fact that it's a poll thread, so I think it's a pity one person is being targetted.

[Shirlias.8104]

@Illurim.6059 said:I'm not forcing anyone to do anything. I'm saying to people who want a block feature that you already have it - it's in YOU. If you choose not to exercise self-control by skipping posts you don't like, that's entirely up to you. There's no selfishness on my part, however much you try to paint me with that brush because it suits your argument to do so. I'm just a person saying to you, someone who wants a block feature, you can block already, but you're choosing not to do so. It's that fact that seems juvenile to me, and your responses haven't improved my assessment.

No you were just assuming things, don't worry.Used to see users like you, so as said it's nothing unexpected.

I wouldn't have blocked anybody just for assumptions ( just to clarify and prevent more assumptions ), but the feature works perfectly and have it's use but, as many features, depends the way the user decide to use them.

@"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" : yeah, polls are definitely part but not the only problem ( but i like the way the tried to organize the SPvP section, through dedicated sticky threads with Staff Answers ).

[Illurim.6059]

@Shirlias.8104 said:

@Illurim.6059 said:I'm not forcing anyone to do anything. I'm saying to people who want a block feature that you already have it - it's in YOU. If you choose not to exercise self-control by skipping posts you don't like, that's entirely up to you. There's no selfishness on my part, however much you try to paint me with that brush because it suits your argument to do so. I'm just a person saying to you, someone who wants a block feature, you can block already, but you're choosing not to do so. It's that fact that seems juvenile to me, and your responses haven't improved my assessment.

No you were just assuming things, don't worry.

I'm unclear on what you think I've assumed. I've specifically addressed blocking and self-control. What assumptions have I made?

Used to see users like you, so as said it's nothing unexpected.

There's no need to be rude.

[Krypto.2069]

I'm seeing some good forum functionality suggestions mentioned above that I would personally use if they were available.But there's one major issue here...

Until a couple/few months ago, The Official GW2 FORUMS couldn't even be SEARCHED.Remember: it took over 5 years for working search capabilities to be implemented (and that's basic and expected forum functionality in the 21st century).

I wouldn't bet 2 copper on seeing anything like adding the ability to block or restrict the visibility of postings based on user ID that's experienced elsewhere anytime soon (or ever). Good ideas, though. :+1:

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

@"sephiroth.4217" said:If only I knew how to post a GIF....

Anyone else think of the episode where Butters filters out all of the comments from the internet related to Cartman before giving it to him to read?

I think the best thing you can do is just take initiative yourself and not read the posters you don't want to read? I'm sure a lot of people already do it. Also such a system could be easily abused by someones ego, you want to complain about something and someone offers simple advice so you just block them and keep complaining, could make for some very nonsensical forums.

Pretty much this. There's a couple of users that I recognize by name and have mentally filed away into the "has nothing worthwhile to say" compartment. If I see their names, I just skip ahead.

[Shirlias.8104]

@Illurim.6059 said:

No you were just assuming things, don't worry.

I'm unclear on what you think I've assumed. I've specifically addressed blocking and self-control. What assumptions have I made?

You misunderstood that i was refering to a category and not directly to you ( though the sit down part was exclusively meant for you, in order to suggest you to slow down for a while ).

Used to see users like you, so as said it's nothing unexpected.

There's no need to be rude.

I just answered with the same tone of

Simply don't read it, you have that right and that capability built into your human DNA. Use it.

But instead of poking you i smiled.

[Kapax.3801]

Is it a bad idea.

[Manasa Devi.7958]

@"Illurim.6059" said:It's a forum. People don't have the right to restrict the posts of others because they find them objectionable or "too much to deal with". They do, absolutely, have the right to pass them over and move to posts they find more interesting though. That's what adults do.

Obviously there have to be limits to certain behaviors. Would it be okay if I post 100 frivolous threads every day? No? How about 99? Still too many? How about 98? See where this is going? Let's skip a few numbers. How about 20? 19? 18? 12? Maybe you want to propose a number?

[Arzurag.7506]

Read what you want, ignore what you don´t want to read.Basic ability, as part of the skill "reading", taught since the first class in school.

[Cyrin.1035]

@Vavume.8065 said:

@Cyrin.1035 said:You'd probably get a warning or not responded to because of your invalid report reason.

Spam is a valid reason.

Yes it is. Yet, you can't classify 5 polls, 2 that are completely different and 3 that are split because of the max number of options available, as the intention of spamming the forum.

Spamming is the intentional way of trolling with multiple threads that purposely blot out all other topics and do not generate constructive or friendly discussion. Clearly, I did not have that intention.

If you're talking about every poll I ever made, well that spans quite a few days and months. Still can't be classified as intentional spamming to harm the forum. There is literally no justification for your motivation to report a poll of mine for spam other than simply not liking it.

The purpose of my threads are to bring players together and for the majority that has been achieved. And yet here we have a thread requesting a blocking feature... A thread that only seeks to divide and separate players. Its creator/supporters claim my threads are disruptive to the forum. What they mean is that they are simply not a fan of the polls, unable to ignore them, and don't think anyone else should be able to participate in them or see them either.

This isn't the issue, however. This is just whinging. It's nothing new. What ultimately matters is what the forum's purpose and policy are. Now I see that there is an unwritten requirement of limited polls and threads, regardless if they are generating mostly positive, friendly, or constructive discussion. And that unwritten requirement may now become written and official because of the complaints of a petty minority. If that truly is the integrity of this forum, then I'm not sure what the purpose of this forum is.

[Cyrin.1035]

@Manasa Devi.7958 said:

@"Illurim.6059" said:It's a forum. People don't have the right to restrict the posts of others because they find them objectionable or "too much to deal with". They do, absolutely, have the right to pass them over and move to posts they find more interesting though. That's what adults do.

Obviously there have to be limits to certain behaviors. Would it be okay if I post 100 frivolous threads every day? No? How about 99? Still too many? How about 98? See where this is going? Let's skip a few numbers. How about 20? 19? 18? 12? Maybe you want to propose a number?

How about 5 that generate positive discussion vs one thread that is intended solely to request a blocking feature? It's not your decision to decide what is or isn't frivolous and acceptable on the forum. If the majority of forum users are responding just fine to it in a positive, constructive, and friendly way, just as they do to any playful or serious thread that's been made and currently on the board, then your complaint of the thread being frivolous is irrelevant.