First of all, I’m sorry for creating this thread because I am pretty sure I have seen such a thread but couldn’t find it with the search function. Anyways I would appreciate an ignore function to hide posts from certain members - like the flagged posts are hidden and can still be seen upon clicking. Since I’m sure this request has been made and denied before, all I am effectively asking for is probably a reminder of why this is not desirable. It is true that I could, in theory, simply not read the posts by said users, which is an excellent response to my question, in theory. But, as it turns out, I am unable to do so - for whatever reasons. It is not the end of the world, but it would increase my forum experience if there was such a function.
There is a mute user function in our preferences. Not sure what it does though.
Here is a discussion on the mute function and how it works from the Discourse site (Discourse being the name of the software that powers these forums):
There is no way at present to completely hide posts from people you don’t want to read. You can prevent them from appearing in your notifications, however.
Thanks for the reply. Aside from this I think this forum’s functions and layout are amazing.
Just filter as you go by yourself, flybottle…
There’s a few, but not many whose posts I almost always ignore or sometimes read but never reply to. This is normal for a site with this many visitors i believe.
I think that it is necessary that this site offers an Ignore Feature - Lots of people on here and the Moderators are few and they are very busy I am sure.
Flagging others does not always work out.
I am all for an Ignore Feature - the Mute option is not enough in my opinion.
Its about time
The makers of the software unfortunately have no interest in adding that feature. I would find it useful, too.
I am struck by the implications, I guess. Some people here seem to think that they are required to read posts they don’t want to. Why is that?
Is that “normal?” Or is that a symptom of sz (for some, not all)? An upshot of the implanted – and then normalized – belief that one must attend to input from invasive parents?
No one holds any guns to my head. If I don’t want to read something, I don’t.
“Reward or ignore; never punish.” – Ho Ne Lin
(And one could elect to ignore all this, too.)
I had a bit more time to think about this, and came up with the notion that some (not all) sz pts – those whose boundaries were regularly breached; whose young egos invaded typically by parents, grandparents or older siblings – develop a mental rule that they mist attend to what is said by those “authorities.” But is that in fact actually the case?
The same reason I rubberneck at traffic accidents. I’m human.
“I had a bit more time to think about this, and came up with the notion that some (not all) sz pts – those whose boundaries were regularly breached; whose young egos invaded typically by parents, grandparents or older siblings – develop a mental rule that they mist attend to what is said by those “authorities.” But is that in fact actually the case?”
I did that as a child… because if I didn’t, I got yelled at, slapped, spanked, humiliated, and otherwise abused by the “monsters” I was compelled by circumstance to have to put up with to survive. Having now observed as many sz pts as I have, my sense is that what I went through is relatively – though not totally – common among them.
I found “separation” and “individuation” and “detachment” in large (though not complete) part in Co-dependents Anonymous years ago. I have built on that ever since, though I do not have anything like “perfect” separation, individuation or detachment. “Progress not perfection,” and all that.
It is not always as easy to filter out content as you might think. Especially if people quote an offending party.
But is the problem the writer’s or the reader’s? Look. If one go out of one’s way to offend people, that’s one thing. But if people are offended because they don’t like what the writer said or the way he said it, what is that?
(Hint: Some – though not all – sz pts tend to project meanings on what others say and do that are simply not supported by the evidence.)
It can be either dependant on the content of the post. People may be offended because what the writer said was genuinely offensive or it may be a case of reading hostile intent into a neutral, inoffensive post.
With psychosis the latter is always possible and can and does occur.
I ,for one, don’t always know when someone is joking or being tongue in cheek or actually meaning what they say.
I think very few people here are deliberately offensive but it’s in the nature of people who experience psychosis that things sometimes get misconstrued and a negative reaction occurs.
It is the reader’s. But it is a problem to some, even though theory dictates it ought not to be. Maybe experience should dictate theory here, rather than the other way around.
It’s one thing to block a post so you can’t read it, but it is a different matter to block it so nobody can read it. That is infringing on a basic right.
I personally would like to block a poster that constantly writes things that cause me to be delusional and sad. This person posga topics and I avoid them unless, someone replies to that poster, then I have no way of knowing who started the topic until I am already in it, and seeing as how this person usually only posts a few lines, and I am adept at glancing at a page and knowing what is said, I inadvertently put myself into a negative space.
In my case, I was attacked by someones toxic post - I did what I was supposed to do, and that was flag this particular offensive post.
Nothing came from it - the post is still there for everyone to see.
At this point an Ignore Feature would solve a lot of these problems.
How did I miss that?
Its OK I really dont want to stir things up with this particular poster, I dont think that he is doing so well if you ask me
That is how I feel about a particular poster.