If I can get some guidance with code snippet from core that uses the ignored user function to check post/comment that hides post if author of post/comment is ignored.
I am looking to create a modification to have it check if a post/comment is a reply to an ignored user and hide the post/comment if made to an ignored user.
perhaps have a look at this one? (edit: you already have)
but I think this is going to be a difficult endeavour. if you can somehow get the post hider to work, how are you going to filter out quoted posts of ignored users for example? the user will still see the replies to the ignored member.
Think of a long topic where a bunch of people have others on ignore. the whole topic will be out of context if that happens. All it would take would be 2 or 3 people ignoring a few others and the overlapping ignore circles would create chaos when they all post. People keep looking at this true block problem from the perspective of one user. assuming such a function is possible, as soon as it’s enabled, all these overlapping circles of ignored users will make a mess.
I guess it is here:
Yes I have looked over that TC. Myself I am not concerned about posts with quotes. The whole context of a topic is not really an issue. We often have topics without ignored users where people simply discuss with certain participants.
Ignore feature has already been exploded and proven to work on many platforms. Like Reddit, FB and so that use a 2way block. Giving end users of a site self serve options to ignore content from the ignored and replies(this is where most often a quote will typically be) only serves to help reduce drama and stress on a mod team.
Linca’s TC you linked helps to fill one gap as prior to them making it new topics would included topics of the ignored as well as in searches. In a perfect world no one would need an ignore/block control. As one would simply pass reading anything from an individual. Unfortunately a lot of folks have difficulty doing so.
I also remember it took awhile before the team would even consider adding the mute/ignore user function.
Sometimes ppl are so polarized by their own disdain toward another they feel we as mods should ban ppl as they feel that person(s) is ruining the site for all. I lost a really good contributor who found the ignore function was not good enough as he was bothered by an ignored user who in his opinion was gas lighting others. Even with me explaining the site will notify moderators and the ignored; the community might be finding them toxic if 5 ppl ignored them
I explained or tried to. That the person had not met that threshold. Had the replies to said ignored user were hidden he would have been satisfied and not bothered.
This is where imho the team needs to be more open to the idea with a simple toggle in site settings and maybe also additionally if enabled a user choice on ignore level.
If one’s community discussions are impacted as just about everyone is ignoring each other. Then one really doesn’t have a community.
Thank you Linca. I will look over this and see if I can figure this out. Only additional piece I may need help with is switching target from post/comment author to the person the reply is to.
And if I can figure how to port it to JScript. I think studying your TC may also help. I have tried some AI inquiries but not much luck so far. A JScript imho is best as it has no big restrictions to install vs a plugin and the person using the feature is highly unlikely going to try and circumvent it.
Best one I had sorta kind of working simply blanked quoted content but still showed there was a quote. But imho simply hiding direct replies should be sufficient for most.
This could be, good reason to be wary of this kind of feature to avoid that.
That is too bad about your loss.
The notification threshold of if five different members to have ignored someone seems kind of arbitrary depending on scale of site. There may be good reason to take moderation action before that number is reached.
In theory this idea makes sense to allow people to hide/ignore both another member and primary direct responses to them. Literal example of this would be that people have a right to bring their own ear muffs to a community meeting so that they don’t have to listen to everyone, and if a lot of arguing breaks out in response to what someone says probably good idea to keep ear muffs on until/if that calms down.
However if there is important information in comments / discussion that people are ignoring then there will be redundancy in discussion and possible confusion from missing that.
6000 Members; with at that time 300 members regularly active. 5 is very small value.
Other platforms already demonstrates it does not affect the discussions & that is the platforms that use a mutual block. Meaning if you block someone you don’t see each other’s posts or replies to one another. See Reddit
I personally think just hiding direct replies is sufficient vs the mutual block as the mutual block you might lose some good info.
There is a topic on here about shadow bans if you recall? The curre t Discourse Ignore feature works more like a personal shadowban vs a site wide one. Which while site wide shadowbans are maybe not a good idea. Discourse’s personal ignore shadowban is not bad it just needs to have more finess to give those who need a touch more controls.
The whole position important info will be lost is a misperception. The team here for a long time avoided any ignore user options & later even added not only this part feature but added permanent as an option as well.
A member prior to the team here adding this part feature. One of my members created his own tampermonkey script with ab ignore user feature and it also dressed up Ops, certain groups and also added nicks to certain users
It was not a more complete block but was sufficient at that time with the membership when he shared the script. As prior their was no option at all.
Bottomline there are communities that really need this extension. A theme component should be sufficient. If you want a key type community - Mental health help communities & political communities can be quite polarized. An over simplified ignore is simply not enough to keep drama down. Some may even need what people call a “True Complete Block”. However I suspect my proposal will be sufficient for most. A TC is sufficient as no one that will use the feature is going to try and circumvent it.
With Reddit if you have a Reddit account does that work for all reddit pages or are there independent sites as with discourse? The discourse feature to ban email/I.P. seems like may be already more powerful feature than what other platforms may have.
That was interesting topic believe was closed.
Hadn’t thought about this as that, but could be seen as that for instance people may think their posts are visible and being read by other members when in fact they are not, but that would also be apparent in that there aren’t responses.
That really depends on whether or not there is anything important in what is being ignored.
For a site with thousands of members conversations could of course keep going with some people choosing to ignore some other folks.
Polarization is no good, that is a major problem with some political systems which were intentionally built to maintain constant polarization just for the sake of being polarized.
Reddit is a system of Pocket Communities. When you choose to block a person it is site wide.
The Community Moderators are not like full mods on discourse instance. There for example you can address flags and custom flags; however the flags are anonymous. Only the Reddit team can see who flagged. At most a com mod can due is report flag abuse.
The email ip ban is not something a Reddit Community mod has any control of. Being a platform where anyone can create and manage a sub community. It would be foolish to allow anyone that level of access. Discourse’s Category Mod is more akin to this. Richard recently released a great plugin that extends moderation powers to both full mods & category mods to silence a user from a category vs a site wide silence. Note the category mod does not gain the option of a site wide silence. On his road map he plans to eventually add time limit & full category ban.
Indeed this is just one of the types a more complete is a need.
Bottom line forums who don’t want to use an optional add on don’t need too. Those that do; do so with the very minor risk the team is concerned with. Some would also say there should be an option to prevent a member from unfollowing a category as the site may require users follow a specific category that has for example important site info. 
And that is maybe another truth.
You have seen for yourself sometimes other community members react poorly to an individual simply because of their communication style.
Is that @RGJ Richard?
That is probably a good feature.
Not certain what you are referencing about that, but sure one’s manner of communicating can cause more reaction/response than always seems reasonable.
It can be in perception of someone’s intention, such as may be difficult to tell over text what/why someone is talking about if they are speaking/writing in metaphor or parable with specific reason and purpose, as opposed to intentionally trying to derail a conversation.
Can help to call them to check what is going on over the phone instead of text.
This was exactly the case. Why I say misperception/misunderstanding intent and caused some to have difficulty with an individual. This is often a source of intolerance.
A small community like the idea you’re trying to build a phone call can help. But with large broad communities with international membership could be detrimental with the volume of calls that might be received.
That was why Jag from his pov used the metaphor he did. As he did not have the context of your community plan idea
Wouldn’t necessarily need to be too much call volume. For moderation mods could just say need to talk on the phone with someone before lifting account silence/suspension if that is necessary.
Unless really necessary Silence is best as the member can still respond to pm from Mod. Phone calls work not bad If local membership but depending if volume of auto silences from the system could be quite grueling. But like the proposal of improved ignore function only way to know is to try it and go from there.
Yeah that would be different topic wasn’t talking about auto-silence, more for if there is really unusual account activity that could be unauthorized access or something where you need to do identity verification / other reason. Would be at moderator’s discretion if they want to try talking with someone on the phone or not that isn’t always helpful.
Have seen things start to fall apart in communication over multiple years if communication is text only there can be problems with that.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.