[AATW]

Iceman mentioned something in AR which reminded me of something.
I have raised this with Pete privately, but a certain poster does have a habit of sending people abusive DMs when riled.
It seems to be his way of circumventing the rules about personal abuse.
There's no way of reporting a DM, and while I don't think DMs should be covered by the same rules as posts on the fora, I don't think people should have carte blanche to spam people with abusive DMs either.

I believe Pete discussed this with the other mods but I'm not aware there was any outcome.

[Dr David Thork]

Go into account settings. There you will find an ignore list. Add your nemesis to this list. Poooof! No more DMs from Markjo.

[Iceman]

Ezpz

[AATW]

Go into account settings. There you will find an ignore list. Add your nemesis to this list. Poooof! No more DMs from Markjo.

I think Pete mentioned that option. But that feels like reporting someone for stalking and the police telling me to move. Shouldn’t action be taken against the stalker?

And if I do the above does that also mean I won’t see their posts on the fora. In this case maybe not a bad thing I guess, but overall I want to see their posts on the fora, I just don’t want abusive DMs

[Dr David Thork]

Go into account settings. There you will find an ignore list. Add your nemesis to this list. Poooof! No more DMs from Markjo.

I think Pete mentioned that option. But that feels like reporting someone for stalking and the police telling me to move. Shouldn’t action be taken against the stalker?

So what you are saying is ... 'I don't want to move on Mr Police Officer. I'd like you to use the violence of the state on this person that I don't like. Can you bring to bear your monopoly on violence upon them?'.

I mean, that's a very common thing that many people ask for. But those people are usually purple haired weirdos who like pushing extreme views to enable their weird lifestyle choices.

You can easily just move along. But instead you'd rather hang around provoking a reaction so that the cops get involved and the person you don't like gets arrested. How long have you been a member of Antifa?

[AATW]

Stop being such a Thork.

[Pete Svarrior]

For what it's worth, I haven't forgotten about that question, and we did discuss it among the mods. There wasn't a clear consensus, with views ranging from "if you can block people, then there's no problem" to "we shouldn't allow serious abuse, and PMs should be no exception". I think most of us leaned towards adjusting the rules, but I wouldn't want to pretend that I'm speaking for everyone.

My proposal would be to extend rule 2 - which already applies in CN, AR, etc. - to also encompass PMs. That way, if Thork wants to message me about his fetishes, he can, because it doesn't bother me, but the moment someone makes it clear they're feeling harassed, the sender should back off. Of course, this wouldn't apply retroactively, so anyone currently engaging in such cheerful exchanges would have time to adjust.

[AATW]

Oops, he did it again...

To be clear, I don't want a certain poster to be sending me abusive PMs because he can't control his toddler-like tendencies.

Please tell him to desist.

[stack]

You might be able to do something with this as sort of a clunky workaround:



You'd have to create a "buddy" list. Not sure how to do that.

[Dr David Thork]

You might be able to do something with this as sort of a clunky workaround:

You'd have to create a "buddy" list. Not sure how to do that.

He doesn't want to. He wants someone to use moderator powers on the perpetrator. Its not a stop to the messages he wants. It is revenge.

toddler-like tendencies

That makes it sound like it is me. It is not me. I rarely DM anyone.

[stack]

You might be able to do something with this as sort of a clunky workaround:

You'd have to create a "buddy" list. Not sure how to do that.

He doesn't want to. He wants someone to use moderator powers on the perpetrator. Its not a stop to the messages he wants. It is revenge.

"Revenge"? Really? Isn't that a taste heavy-handed?

There are several ways to handle it.

- Delete on sight before reading
- Put them on ignore
- Create a PM buddy list thing, however that works
- Update SMF to have an "Ignore" list just for PM's and nothing else
- Have a rule and a reporting to Mod avenue for some sort of intervention which could be as heavy-handed as a warning or as light as suggestion like, "WTF is your problem?"

Each has their pluses and minuses. For example, the last one may sort of stop the asshole from doing so to more than one individual. But then places the burden on mods to have to make a call and intervene, etc.

Delete on sight works, but you have to delete the email too which shows the content in the preview window. And for me, in my email client, I can't see which user it's from until I click on it and it loads into the preview window.

Buddy list may be useful, but then it of course excludes anyone not on it.

Probably a module out there or maybe just a few snips of php to set up a PM ignore list, don't know, but requires effort.

But revenge, no. Just sanity.

[AATW]

He doesn't want to. He wants someone to use moderator powers on the perpetrator. Its not a stop to the messages he wants. It is revenge.

No, it's a stop to the messages I want. And as I said above I don't think I should have to do anything to make that happen.
When Tom ran crying to the mods to say that the bigger boys were being mean to him - in AR, which was within the rules - the mods did something. They didn't tell him that he should deal with it by keeping out of the thread in question. That was an option, but they took action to stop someone being harassed and as big a baby as I think Tom was being, that was probably the right thing to do.
I'm asking for the same here.

[Dr David Thork]

He doesn't want to. He wants someone to use moderator powers on the perpetrator. Its not a stop to the messages he wants. It is revenge.

No, it's a stop to the messages I want.

I already told you how to do that. You weren't interested.

Go into account settings. There you will find an ignore list. Add your nemesis to this list. Poooof! No more DMs from Markjo.

[AATW]

He doesn't want to. He wants someone to use moderator powers on the perpetrator. Its not a stop to the messages he wants. It is revenge.

No, it's a stop to the messages I want.

I already told you how to do that. You weren't interested.

And I explained why. And I just have again.

[Pete Svarrior]

We currently have no rules governing PMs. "I want to be happy but not to do anything about it" is unlikely to stick as a case to change the rules (your case was much stronger before you revealed your true intentions just now).

Your happiness is one click away - considerably less effort than writing lengthy non-sequiturs about how you're still upset about rule 2.

[AATW]

We currently have no rules governing PMs.

I know. I am suggesting you do. And above you seemed to agree that it would be a good idea:

My proposal would be to extend rule 2 - which already applies in CN, AR, etc. - to also encompass PMs. That way, if Thork wants to message me about his fetishes, he can, because it doesn't bother me, but the moment someone makes it clear they're feeling harassed, the sender should back off. Of course, this wouldn't apply retroactively, so anyone currently engaging in such cheerful exchanges would have time to adjust.

your case was much stronger before you revealed your true intentions just now).

I don’t know what that mean. My intention is to improve the board’s experience. Not just for me. A certain poster circumvents the rules about abusing other posters by sending them abusive PMs. I don’t believe that should be allowed. You have previously indicated you agree with me.

[Pete Svarrior]

And above you seemed to agree that it would be a good idea.

I still do, but you need to keep in mind that imposing restrictions on users is something we don't do lightly. As one of our main champions of the "mods shouldn't do anything ever" cause, I'm sure you can see why.

I know. I am suggesting you do.

The "why" is very important here. When two members were complaining about abusive PMs, it seemed likely that this would grow into a widespread issue. If it does, then it becomes pretty obvious that something should be done. However, if you actively choose for your problems to continue (for example, by not choosing to ignore the one person that's annoying you), who are we to make you happy against your own will?

I don’t know what that mean.

Okay, let's expand on 2 parts of your recent post, then.

No, it's a stop to the messages I want. And as I said above I don't think I should have to do anything to make that happen.

Sorry - that's never going to happen. Rule change or not, it would always be down to you to do something. Right now, you have a way of doing it yourself, without involving us, and without starting drama over it. You are asking for a more complicated process to be implemented, for your sole benefit (the only other person I'd heard from used the ignore function as far as I know), and one that involves pointless back-and-forths and drama. It is difficult to believe that you're doing it for anything else than drama or, as Thork suggested, revenge.

When Tom ran crying to the mods to say that the bigger boys were being mean to him - in AR, which was within the rules

It wasn't within the rules. Rule 2 applies in all fora. I explained this to you time and time again, and it really doesn't matter if you think otherwise.

Therein lies a crux of the issue. When you and your buddies went out of your way to harass one member as a group and continued once he asked you to back off, you broke the rules. When you decided to start further threads harassing Tom to manifest your Marvellous Objection™, you once again broke the rules. The one user currently messaging you mean words is not breaking the rules. The case for changing the rules is contentious among mods (even if I personally lean towards it) and there's not enough evidence of this being a big enough issue to restrict everyone's use of the forum for the future.

My intention is to improve the board’s experience. Not just for me.

I believed you until the post I just quoted. You now made it clear that this is just another complaint about that one time you weren't allowed to break the rules.

Ignore him. If the problem becomes more widespread, there may be a stronger case for adjusting the rules.

[garygreen]

fwiw i think it's perfectly logical to suggest that if we're not allowed to spam insults at someone on the forum, then we shouldn't be allowed to circumvent that by sending those messages as pms. no offense my dude, but you are just way way to quick to assign malice to other users simply because they don't agree with the way you see things.

also yes for sure users can just put that person on their ignore list. but it seems reasonable to say "i want to see the things this person posts on the forum but not the insulting private messages they send."

[Pete Svarrior]

fwiw i think it's perfectly logical to suggest that if we're not allowed to spam insults at someone on the forum, then we shouldn't be allowed to circumvent that by sending those messages as pms.

I agree - it just so happens that I'm not the sole decision-maker here. Restricting everyone's use of the forum for the sake of one person is not a popular suggestion at this point in time (and if this was someone else's idea, AATW would be starting thread after thread about how much he hates new rules).

no offense my dude, but you are just way way to quick to assign malice to other users simply because they don't agree with the way you see things.

He doesn't disagree with how I see things - we're both on board with the change. Nonetheless, starting pointless drama over it is not going to help, and, indeed, is very likely to only make things worse. He didn't get what he wanted, so now he's trolling. I should probably just close this thread, but let's see if others want to chime in - not with meta-discussion on whether AATW's trolling is very good and legitimate, or whether it's trolling at all (take that to AR), but with specific comments regarding the suggestion made in the OP.

also yes for sure users can just put that person on their ignore list. but it seems reasonable to say "i want to see the things this person posts on the forum but not the insulting private messages they send."

You can still see the posts of someone you ignored - you just have to click on them to reveal them.

[Rama Set]

I had a similar thought to Gary’s that someone might want to engage publicly with someone’s posts but not have to deal with whatever content is sent privately. It seems a reasonable thing to do. Is there a way to have separate ignore lists for DMs and posts that is easy to implement? If there is, then that would seem a simple fix to my ignorant ass.