Blocking an individual from reading your posts ('Ignore' reciprocal)

I'm talking about protecting your posts so that the one or two passive aggressive internet stalker asshats aren't jumping on your posts.

That way the asshat isn't tempted to write shit about your post. Most people are pretty cool. It's just one or two ankle biters that can 'f' up the enjoyment. Originally Posted by NormalBob

If someone pays for a lifetime membership, shouldn't they be able to see your reviews? Or anything else you post?

It sounds to me like you just don't want to have to hear what people say to you, and you want to forbid them from being able to say it to everyone else too. If you can't read what they (meaning I) say, what more do you need?

I would think the providers would like this feature because it seems like all of them have at least one or two guys they would just as soon would Ignore them. Originally Posted by NormalBob

Now you're talkin'!!

It takes two to effectively ignore each other. This tool is for those times when you can't get an individual to put you on their Ignore List. Originally Posted by NormalBob

No actually it only takes one to effectively ignore each other... you can ignore someone and they'll eventually tire of being asswipes. Just ignore those you don't like.. simple..

So Bob, are you gonna make every comment you post a BCD comment? Because I read this thread before I ever bothered to login, as I do most of the time. I only logged in to post this reply. If you are not going to limit everything you write to BCD, then would you be expecting the coders to be psychic as to who is reading the thread? Or do you also expect them to stop lurkers altogether by requiring a login for any read access to ECCIE, all just to be able to implement your reciprocal blocking request?

No Lefty, I'm not recommending every comment posted be a BCD comment. I'm just recommending an equivalent to an Ignore List.

If there is a way to prevent a limited number of people from reading your posts Originally Posted by NormalBob

But to prevent userX from reading your posts, then Eccie needs to know it is userX doing the reading, which means that either:
(1) Eccie would have to require EVERYONE to login before being able to read anything. Currently a login is not required.
(2) All of your comments would have to be viewable only to those who have chosen to login, so ECCIE could exclude userX from seeing yours.

I asked if you wanted all of your comments BCD because ECCIE already requires a login to read those comments. Surely you are not asking for an entirely new category of comments that are viewable only to those who are logged in, while not being restricted to those with BCD access.

So now I'm guessing you want option #1, no more anonymous browsing?

Let me say it a different way.

You, NormalBob, hate me, LeftySmith, and you don't want me reading anything that you posted. So you create a DENY list and add me to it.

If I am logged in as LeftySmith, then ECCIE could easily disallow me from reading anything posted by NormalBob.

But what about when I just browse the threads without logging in?

And if you are okay with only denying me from seeing your posts when I am logged in as LeftySmith, then this DENY list becomes completely voluntary on MY part, as I can choose to read your comments without logging in, or I can choose to be denied your posts by logging in before I read.

And if it is voluntary on my part, then it is pointless because I would have already put you on my IGNORE list.

You, NormalBob, hate me, LeftySmith, and you don't want me reading anything that you posted. So you create a DENY list and add me to it. Originally Posted by LeftySmith

Which would then allow NormalBob to say anything he wants about or concerning LeftySmith without Leftysmith having the ability to know what's being said about him - which, for me, would spoil at least some of the fun. Ultimately that would have the effect of preventing LeftySmith from being able to respond properly if necessary. Hardly seems like a good idea.

If Bob doesn't want to read my comments towards or about him, anyone or anything else, that's fine. But whether he can read them or not should be his choice, not mine.

So now I'm guessing you want option #1, no more anonymous browsing? Originally Posted by LeftySmith

My request was more limited than what you've described.

The limit of the technical solution I recommended was to take the behavior of the Ignore List and flip that capability inside out so that an individual (Person A) would essentially be able to force themselves on to a particular individual's Ignore List (Person B). There are at least two design alternatives that could be evaluated.

1. Implement the same capability of the Ignore List in a Protect List format relying on some of the code used for the Ignore List. This would be able to be managed through the Control Panel.
2. Writing what feels like a smaller amount of code so that an individual can put themselves on to someone's Ignore List.
3. Some other approach that a real software engineer came up with based on real knowledge of the code.

Can these be defeated by having Person B browse the forums without logging in?

Yes... to an extent. Person B would still have to log in so that he or she could submit a post. While logged in, he or she could not see the writings of Person A. Person A's comments would be collapsed the same way that someone on Person A's Ignore List collapse in the current software implementation. As a result, Person B would have to have a greater level of motivation to step on Person A's posts than what he or she needs currently.

To your point, it would be reasonably easy for Person B to defeat the protection status chosen by Person A.

However, I do not think that more sophisticated approaches to further increase that protection status would be worth the investment. More sophisticated approaches can also be defeated by a motivated Person B using low tech techniques such as Person B maintaining a secondary ('sock puppet') account or by having one of their friends, Person C, copy and paste Person A's posts in email or PM to Person B.

The approach I'm recommending is intended as a clear signal to Person B that they are being ignored and provides a limited technical barrier making it moderately more inconvenient for Person B to respond to Person A. It provides a gradation of enhanced protection and not comprehensive protection.

My proposal was based on the apparently flawed assumption that this new feature would not require a great deal of programming. From the feedback above, it seems like I was mistaken.

There may be some that would want the technical solution you've suggested. I am not one of those people.

Thank you for considering this thread's proposal.

Clearly NormalBob doesn't believe in the philosophy of keeping your friends close, and your enemies closer.