Can some kind person instruct me how to block another forum user please
I know under the "More" dropdown there's the choice to "report abuse". I had occasion to use it once or twice in the many thousands of posts I've read, but I'm not sure who monitors those complaints.
If you get posts sent to your email box, another approach might be to use your email's filter based on text of incoming email.
Maybe someone else has another suggestion.
Only Faithlife Admin can effectively block/remove a user based on reported abuse. Note that posts can be removed for exceeding Forum Guidelines without waiting for Reports.
I know under the "More" dropdown there's the choice to "report abuse".
Thanks Lew, it would appear that reporting goes into the void. if there is no current feature I hope the new forum allows us to make our own decisions.
Thanks Dave
I find it wild that someone has behaved in such a way to need blocking. i hope you get it figured out.
It is not what you are looking for, but the ultimate choice is yours not to read posts from specific individuals or threads. In every community, a handful usually have an abrasive style or love to troll. I skip over posts by those that I don't find their contributions are that useful. Also, there are specific topics I will avoid, such as contentious theological points or a subject that has been beaten to the ground (e.g., subscription mega threads).
If everyone does this, some of the fire in a forum would get much less oxygen. Plus, you get more time to study! win/win! 🏆
A couple of years ago, I had an issue with another member. I contacted the admins and was told I had no such options. I could block them from seeing my profile, but that was about it. Maybe that will change when the forums get updated. But for now, that seems to be the only options.
If everyone does this, some of the fire in a forum would get much less oxygen.
But that ignores 'the evidence'. The high-view threads are the pile-on threads ... especially if the offending pile-ee keeps getting back up! Even FL waits several pages, before 'stepping in'.
Personally, I'm not desirous of muting other Logosians ... the ones that need muting are generally ushered off the stage by FL.
I believe the new forum software will allow users with favored opinions to send to users with unfavored opinions a lobotomy-simulating electric shockwave through the offender's display. Will that do?
It is not what you are looking for, but the ultimate choice is yours not to read posts from specific individuals or threads. In every community, a handful usually have an abrasive style or love to troll. I skip over posts by those that I don't find their contributions are that useful. Also, there are specific topics I will avoid, such as contentious theological points or a subject that has been beaten to the ground (e.g., subscription mega threads).If everyone does this, some of the fire in a forum would get much less oxygen. Plus, you get more time to study! win/win! 🏆
Thanks Donovan. I wouldn’t describe it as ultimate 😆 but you are right in that it is the only available option. I don’t think it is a good thing that people should have to take such evasive action. I do realise it is the only option, due to forum limitations. I am hoping that will change soon.
It will be a good start 😎
But that ignores 'the evidence'. The high-view threads are the pile-on threads.
It’s true. It’s like when you are driving down the road and everyone slows down to get a good look at the car crash.
It’s such a strange contradiction that in a civil society these types are apparently afforded more freedom than others. Actually it is probably one of the symptoms of a civil society. Still, I will cheer the appearance of a block button myself.
I don’t think it is a good thing that people should have to take such evasive action. I do realise it is the only option, due to forum limitations. I am hoping that will change soon
Antony,
Interesting idea, but I am curious how you see this playing out? Would there just be blanks where blocked people have posted in a thread? I imagine it would be hard to follow a conversation if one is only able to see bits and pieces. As hard as it is to implement, I agree with Donovan that self control is the best solution. Please pray for me; I need more. JK, but not really...
When I really start to lose my patience is when I realize that the car crash is on the other side of the road. [:S]
[
Antony, Interesting idea, but I am curious how you see this playing out?
Interesting idea, but I am curious how you see this playing out?
Hi AaronWell in my experience it has been no different than judiciously avoiding looking at their posts, which is what you are recommending 😉. Blocking just automates the process. The added benefit is that they will not be able to attempt any interaction with me. This is the first forum I can remember participating in where the option is not available.
When I really start to lose my patience is when I realize that the car crash is on the other side of the road.
Exactly, or when you realise they are slowing down to look at nothing at all because it’s no longer happening.
This is the first forum I can remember participating in where the option is not available
I get what you're saying. The intention of these forums, though, is primarily for users to help other users in the use of Bible software. It's really not intended to be a place for controversial discussion, so if it devolves into that, something has gone amiss. Personally, it would be disappointing to see users blocking one another on here. I mean, wow, what a testimony!
If it is a case of harassment, report it to Logos and they will take action. If it is a case of personal preference welcome to the real world where God has placed some truly annoying people ... I hope it was to encourage my personal growth not simply test my patience.
Blocking just automates the process. The added benefit is that they will not be able to attempt any interaction with me. This is the first forum I can remember participating in where the option is not available.
Would being able to block an individual affect posts where that individual has been quoted by another user?
Thanks M.J.
It’s not the real world. ( I do accept is is ‘A’ world)
In the real world I don’t associate with people like this. In the real world I don’t come across so many either. They proliferate on the Internet due to well studied and reported psychological factors. Most people have had the experience of confusion when their friends in the real world appear on on social media and transform into lunatics. Many won’t have seen the Goofy cartoon from years ago where every time he got behind the wheel of a car he became a mad driver. Then when he got out he turned back into the happy go lucky goofy guy he always was.
A significant part of my paid employment was taken up in managing these kinds of people, both up and down the hierarchy. During which time I got all the personal growth I was afforded. Now I am retired I choose not to have to engage with that kind of character where possible. I will be much happier if my button comes along in the new forum, and I expect many others will be as well.
I can say that you and others are good role models in dealing with the situations, of which we speak, that arise here. Others, not so much.
Personally, it would be disappointing to see users blocking one another on here. I mean, wow, what a testimony!
Well, in the Logosian coffeetable tradition, it's the equivalent to covering your ears ... "I.Can't.Hear.You!"
I don‘t know Dave. It depends on the way the new forum structures posts. It probably won’t detect the quote as it will likley only detect the meta information where the poster is recorded.
It is, in my opinion anyway, much more disappointing to see the behaviour of some of the people who are allowed to repeatedly post here.
Oh no! I just realised I might be turning in to one of them, answering every post in the thread?
I have always appreciated the light touch that Logos has had in managing the forum. I have been on others where some seem to get banned, while others get away with a lot. It is hideous and not a nice look.
I prefer to skip over posts by users who are over the top or trolling. It is the same with threads that become repetitive or are divisive theologically. (Aside from official announcements, I have not read any of the subscription mega threads for months)
It seems there are always a few on every forum, but if the community does not respond to those like this, it starves the fires of oxygen. It is hard to have a debate with yourself! (or is it!?!)
That's just my preference, of course.
I value your considered opinion, along with those of everyone who has respond so far.
Over the years the sort of people you are referring to appear, make a lot of noise for a few weeks or months, then disappear again. It got worse around the time of the Wordsearch onboarding, and a few other occasions. My usual tactic nowadays is to avoid posts where those people are active, avoid mega threads, and stay away from the forums for a few weeks when it gets bad. I did report one as abuse a few days ago, and whenever I have done that the person concerned has normally gone a bit quieter and calmer.
I do think it has been quite a bit worse recently.
Thanks for your perspective Greg. Sounds like it has been a bit riotous before as well.
Ignoring someone is a way of blocking in a sense. And it works in the sense that keeps your frustration with that ignored post down.... [8-|]
Ignoring someone is a way of blocking in a sense. And it works in the sense that keeps your frustration with that ignored post down....
Thanks for that Mate
I guess it is
I'd just like to automate it so it's less effort 😆
Thanks to all the thoughtful and kind responses to this thread. I have thought about it a lot since and your thoughts have given me a different perspective on things.
I am curious how you see this playing out? Would there just be blanks where blocked people have posted in a thread?
X shows "this post is from an account you have blocked"
Thanks David.
I find a happy self-victory in ignoring rather than blocking posts that annoy me. That means I have exercised self-discipline and prevailed over myself. I didn't have to control someone else to choose to do the right thing. Each time is a learning and growing opportunity. Tomorrow I might be in a better mood and quite happy to see the offending post. I tried smart search for this topic in my Logos library but didn't come up with much. perhaps I need to grow the counseling section of my library, which is already big.
👍
It might be worth noting that some of the people I find the most annoying are also often the most knowledgeable and helpful with Logos issues. I won't name names, but you know who you are. [;)]
I keep suggesting people get a little thicker skin...it's the culture in which we live. I'd rather be annoyed occasionally and not miss good input than live comfortably in a bubble.
FWIW...YMMV.
Unless there is direct personal abuse, I do not see why there is a problem. If there is direct abuse, one should certainly report it to Logos.
But if you do not like the person's opinion, just do not read their posts.
It might be worth noting that some of the people I find the most annoying are also often the most knowledgeable and helpful with Logos issues. I won't name names, but you know who you are. I keep suggesting people get a little thicker skin...it's the culture in which we live. I'd rather be annoyed occasionally and not miss good input than live comfortably in a bubble. FWIW...YMMV.
It might be worth noting that some of the people I find the most annoying are also often the most knowledgeable and helpful with Logos issues. I won't name names, but you know who you are.
How dare you tell people to get a thicker skin
Maybe, you should be reported for abuse because thin skin is endowed by God and you can't do anything about it
I keep suggesting people get a little thicker skin...it's the culture in which we live. How dare you tell people to get a thicker skin Maybe, you should be reported for abuse because thin skin is endowed by God and you can't do anything about it
I keep suggesting people get a little thicker skin...it's the culture in which we live.
I was actually thinking of Doc B's post yesterday with respect of how different the cultures are we live in. The last time I heard that defense outside the Logos forums was 1998 when one employee was caught disrespecting another employee with a mild racial slur. Turns out the disrespected employee from Chicago thought he simply had to put up with it. The employee using the slur thought the recipient should "get a thicker skin." It took HR less than an hour to fire the employee using the slur and have him off the premises. Do you see why I am embarrassed to be associated with a forum where some people take offense at being asked to be polite? That is how far outside my culture the comments are.
1Cor10 31"> I keep suggesting people get a little thicker skin...it's the culture in which we live. How dare you tell people to get a thicker skin Maybe, you should be reported for abuse because thin skin is endowed by God and you can't do anything about it I was actually thinking of Doc B's post yesterday with respect of how different the cultures are we live in. The last time I heard that defense outside the Logos forums was 1998 when one employee was caught disrespecting another employee with a mild racial slur. Turns out the disrespected employee from Chicago thought he simply had to put up with it. The employee using the slur thought the recipient should "get a thicker skin." It took HR less than an hour to fire the employee using the slur and have him off the premises. Do you see why I am embarrassed to be associated with a forum where some people take offense at being asked to be polite? That is how far outside my culture the comments are.
1Cor10 31"> I keep suggesting people get a little thicker skin...it's the culture in which we live. How dare you tell people to get a thicker skin Maybe, you should be reported for abuse because thin skin is endowed by God and you can't do anything about it
There is a difference between clear abuse where lines are crossed and perceived abuse. I couldn't figure out from this thread what this abuse the original poster is referring to.
In another thread, someone said "Logos sucks" or something like that and some people took offense, apparently because in some cultures that is bad. How is a forum poster supposed to know about all the cultures that interact on this forum? So let me define what clear abuse is - it is abuse in all cultures. I am sure Logos will do something about people who cross such lines. If it not clear abuse, then it is perceived abuse. People should learn to ignore posts.
I have more of a problem with illogical responses to my questions. I don't want to waste my time rebutting because you know you'll get more illogical responses. And there is no end to such things. So I move along.
a mild racial slur
So bringing up a controversial topic is now equivalent to being called a racial slur?
Forgive me if I can't follow that logic.
And people, please, get some thicker skin. [H]
Nor can I follow yours. As the OP had not provided specific examples, I assumed he was speaking of cases where the posts he wished to block were truly offensive. I do not equate controversial with offensive and therefore am puzzled by the logic of your response. Fortunately, it does not matter. There is no reason that we need to have the same perspective only that we be civil.
