Blocking Issue - Chess Forums - Page 2

TheGrobe

Feb 24, 2014

0

#21

It's just good practice when you stop to think about it.

If I'm going to put thought and effort into meaningful posts only to have them subject to the whims of the OP (like thread deletion, for example), I'm going to stop putting that thought and effort in before too long.

There are already a couple of places here where you can exercise full control over the discussion and the threads fully belong to you: blogs and groups.

TheGrobe

Feb 24, 2014

0

#22

bigpoison wrote:

TheGrobe wrote:

tonightatsix wrote:

I think blocking should absolutely apply to forums. If I see that a person has a penchant for marring people's discussions I don't want them in my thread.

The problem is that the thread isn't your thread -- it belongs to the community. Chess.com clearly came out in favour of this view when they removed the ability for the creators of threads to delete them.

[snip]

You'd think, but how often do you see a thread locked upon the OPs request.

And you're right, there seems to be a bit of a mixed message around this.

RonaldJosephCote

Feb 24, 2014

0

#23

Glen Beck went away because he crossed the line, even by FOX standards. Later he had regrets about what he said. He's an idiot, but the problem is like Howard Stern, he's a rich idiot.

macer75

Feb 24, 2014

0

#24

RonaldJosephCote wrote:

Glen Beck went away because he crossed the line, even by FOX standards. Later he had regrets about what he said. He's an idiot, but the problem is like Howard Stern, he's a rich idiot.

I just googled Glenn Beck. So far I agree with pretty much everything he's said.

tonightatsix

Feb 24, 2014

0

#25

You need to read some more (of what he said) Macer!

TheGrobe

Feb 24, 2014

0

#26

macer75 wrote:

RonaldJosephCote wrote:

Glen Beck went away because he crossed the line, even by FOX standards. Later he had regrets about what he said. He's an idiot, but the problem is like Howard Stern, he's a rich idiot.

I just googled Glenn Beck. So far I agree with pretty much everything he's said.

Yes, especially around the Norweigan Massacre in 2011. Nasty bit of victim blaming there that even manages to invoke Godwin's Law.

macer75

Feb 24, 2014

0

#27

TheGrobe wrote:

macer75 wrote:

RonaldJosephCote wrote:

Glen Beck went away because he crossed the line, even by FOX standards. Later he had regrets about what he said. He's an idiot, but the problem is like Howard Stern, he's a rich idiot.

I just googled Glenn Beck. So far I agree with pretty much everything he's said.

Yes, especially around the Norweigan Massacre in 2011. Nasty bit of victim blaming there that even manages to invoke Godwin's Law.

Yes, I read that part.

bigpoison

Feb 24, 2014

0

#28

That's encouraging.

tonightatsix

Feb 24, 2014

0

#29

I guess we learn something new every day about each other.

trysts

Feb 24, 2014

0

#30

tonightatsix wrote:

I block people who say or leave outrageously offensive things to other people even if I have never interacted with them. I do some investigation to find out why they said what they've said first though. If I find out that a person habitually goes around saying very offensive things, I am not going to chance encountering him/her. It's like in real life, you don't want to engage people with psychiatric problems. It's very taxing to the mind and there's no point to it.

I think blocking should absolutely apply to forums. If I see that a person has a penchant for marring people's discussions I don't want them in my thread.

I also disagree with 200 user ristriction. (why the limit?)

I'm not sure about the deducting points idea though. I think blocking is enough.

I completely agree with you, and have done the same(blocking people from what I've read them say without direct interaction).

trysts

Feb 24, 2014

0

#31

Also, I went through my blocked-list the other night. I had 26 people blocked, and checked to see how many accounts were still open. Now I only have 11 people blocked, since 15 had their accounts closed. That may be useful for people to do if they ever have trouble with the 200 member limit;)

bigpoison

Feb 24, 2014

0

#32

What's going on trysts? Glenn Beck, victim blaming, rich idiots?

Those are some fat ones that you just let go by. Next, you'll be telling us all about the venison tenderloin you had for dinner last night.

trysts

Feb 24, 2014

0

#33

Ha! Glenn Beck is like getting upset over a cartoon character.

Deathwi5h

Feb 24, 2014

0

#34

What a bizaar subject

dashkee94

Feb 24, 2014

0

#35

The feature I'd like to see on the profile page, right along side all the friends display, is how many people are blocked. It would be a handy reference to see just who the block-heads are.

tonightatsix

Feb 24, 2014

0

#36

trysts wrote:

Also, I went through my blocked-list the other night. I had 26 people blocked, and checked to see how many accounts were still open. Now I only have 11 people blocked, since 15 had their accounts closed. That may be useful for people to do if they ever have trouble with the 200 member limit;)

That's a good idea. Thank you, trysts :)

tonightatsix

Feb 24, 2014

0

#37

dashkee94 wrote:

The feature I'd like to see on the profile page, right along side all the friends display, is how many people are blocked. It would be a handy reference to see just who the block-heads are.

That would be kinda amusing to see that. haha I will send flower trophies to those who've blocked me :)

RonaldJosephCote

Feb 24, 2014

0

#38

Trysts; If your still here, Thurs night at 9pm, CNN is doing a thing on the Oscars.

Saluang-Tewei

Feb 24, 2014

0

#39

SPECIAL CASE:
By the way, If you were my opponent who has lost on the game, then I publish that game, do I deserve to be blocked by you for having published it?

GM JMB2010

Mar 2, 2014

0

#40

I haven't read through this whole thread, but I think there should be an option to send 1 message and only 1 to someone who has blocked you. This would be very useful when someone has blocked you over a simple misunderstanding.