Thread options

(post deleted by user)

A list of options that enable a thread starter to state rules for the thread  such as for example X (name of somebody the thread starter considers a jerk) and Y (Jerk's sock puppet) are not allowed to post in that thread.  Would this be a possibility?

I'm trying to figure out what you mean. On the SF we had MOD+, where skeptics who were considered debunkers (not saying those skeptics always engaged in debunking) were not allowed to post and moderators were supposed to keep an eye on the thread. Are you proposing that one should be able to post a thread and designate it so that certain forum members can't participate in that thread? Because, if so, I don't think that is going to fly.

I'm trying to figure out what you mean. On the SF we had MOD+, where skeptics who were considered debunkers (not saying those skeptics always engaged in debunking) were not allowed to post and moderators were supposed to keep an eye on the thread. Are you proposing that one should be able to post a thread and designate it so that certain forum members can't participate in that thread? Because, if so, I don't think that is going to fly.

Let's say you start a thread about something you would like to seriously discuss and you feel comfortable researching and talking about and somebody comes in with a lot of absurd garbage and childish humour and ruins the thread.  Would you not want the option to ban that individual from all future threads of yours?

Let's say you start a thread about something you would like to seriously discuss and you feel comfortable researching and talking about and somebody comes in with a lot of absurd garbage and childish humour and ruins the thread.  Would you not want the option to ban that individual from all future threads of yours?

I would hope they would be banned for posting garbage and being childish by mods, if reported. I would also simply put that user on ignore after reporting them.

I would hope they would be banned for posting garbage and being childish by mods, if reported. I would also simply put that user on ignore after reporting them.

I would like to feel that ignoring is enough but unfortunately I cannot.   If I thought they could take anything seriously at all I would be tempted to troll them to shut them up but they would just laugh that off as well.  The "humour" of these people is often popular with the rest of the forum anyway so I am something of a lone voice in this.

I would like to feel that ignoring is enough but unfortunately I cannot.   If I thought they could take anything seriously at all I would be tempted to troll them to shut them up but they would just laugh that off as well.  The "humour" of these people is often popular with the rest of the forum anyway so I am something of a lone voice in this.

Hm, I'm thinking you might be talking about a poster in particular or something.

I did like the humor of one particular poster on the SF, but then he could suddenly turn on a dime and be quite nasty. Was not a fan of that.

Why not? I would like one where people are not allowed to go in circles, at least make them work new arguments for subsequent posts. I would not abuse it (i.e. not tag all of them), but we saw how ridiculously off track the thread about Guerrer's work went. Depending on the topic, it could be desirable. Also, since it will likely be argued... No, I don't see it as a form of "censorship", new threads are cheap and nobody is preventing offshoots.

With that said, I don't really support a return to the arbitrary "no skeptics" MOD+. There is a difference between asking for some common sense and barring entry.

If you are talking about me, I needn't post in any of your threads.

If you are talking about me, I needn't post in any of your threads.

I have confirmation it is not you.  Sorry if I have implied anywhere that it was.