I'm not aware of any function that limits forum members to select threads. AFAIK it's "all or nothing".I'm not sure if this would help or not, but for popular threads that we'd prefer to stay open, why not ban individual users from posting to the thread if they are not following forum guidelines?
Not the same but you can ignore posters who you'd rather not hear from. Took four years before I used it. But there's some folks who earn it.I'm not sure if this would help or not, but for popular threads that we'd prefer to stay open, why not ban individual users from posting to the thread if they are not following forum guidelines?
Can the moderators set ignore for two people that are bickering? I guess that would be kind of extreme, but so is closing a thread because really there's just one pair of people not being reasonably nice to each other.Not the same but you can ignore posters who you'd rather not hear from. Took four years before I used it. But there's some folks who earn it.
I suppose anything could be done, but I'm not a mod or understand how the application is designed.Can the moderators set ignore for two people that are bickering? I guess that would be kind of extreme, but so is closing a thread because really there's just one pair of people not being reasonably nice to each other.
Y could be notified "We took the liberty of setting person X to be ignored", and vica verca. If you can be nice, feel free to change it back.
I'm pretty sure the forum software doesn't have the capability of banning a member from posting to a thread, and can only ban the user from the forum itself.
I'm not aware of any function that limits forum members to select threads. AFAIK it's "all or nothing".
Summary:
Allows Administrators to ban a user from a particular thread.
Most useful if you have a "flame started" and you don't want to lock the entire thread or ban the user entirely - just keep them out of the thread!
We have a very large team of mods/admins who decide on moderation issues by consensus. The team has numerous means to choose from for dealing with members who do not follow our Community Rules, as well as for dealing with spammers, trolls, and so on.
Not the same but you can ignore posters who you'd rather not hear from. Took four years before I used it. But there's some folks who earn it.
Can the moderators set ignore for two people that are bickering?
See, we're really not jackbooted Nazis.
We have a very large team of mods/admins who decide on moderation issues by consensus. The team has numerous means to choose from for dealing with members who do not follow our Community Rules,
Wonderful!
I think what is being asked for, is for less heavy-handed moderation. It is a shame that important, useful threads are being shut down (or not even being started in the first place) because of individuals who can't discuss politely. Could the mods use some of their 'numerous means' to curtail individuals who cross a line, as opposed to killing/preventing entire threads?
I just wonder whether it's the often the same folks.I don't have an answer, but I would surmise that if a particular thread is pulling a lot of discord, that tells us something about that particular topic. Maybe the better course is to shut it down, rather than try to pick and choose who gets to comment. Although not everyone has the same "hot buttons," some topics are just ripe for hate and discontent, it seems.
I say this, even though I sometimes feel that the party gets shut down just when it's getting interesting
I realize it's a lot of work for the moderators. But it seems unfair to those who are keeping things informational and answering questions to shut a thread down early because one or two other folks waltz in and start causing trouble.
Although I'm a relative newbie to the ER forum, my experience in other forums is that if someone is causing problems, it's not limited to one thread.I'm not sure if this would help or not, but for popular threads that we'd prefer to stay open, why not ban individual users from posting to the thread if they are not following forum guidelines?
^^^ This.I happen to think it is more unfair to ask unpaid volunteers to repeatedly clean up after adults who cannot behave themselves.
[ex-moderator hat on]
[/ex-moderator hat off]
I've often wished there was an option to ignore a poster in a particular thread. .
^^^ This.
I try to think of myself as a guest in someone's home. I may disagree with my host or another of his guests, but try to mind my manners online just as I would in person. If I was at an event and found things intolerable, I would find an excuse to leave. That's even easier to do online.
I say this, even though I sometimes feel that the party gets shut down just when it's getting interesting
What typically happens is the first problematic posts will be removed from a thread and the offending posters warned to cease and desist. Meanwhile, other posters will chime in with more problematic posts. Rinse and repeat. After a round or two the mods will tire of playing whack-a-post and agree to shut the thread down.
... I even sometimes wonder whether some folks like to get a thread shut down. ...