People who ignore/mute others

  • Thread starter Thread starter Polak
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Now could we, do you think, possibly, stick to the topic please?
Good idea. Is there anything else we haven’t turned over?

I would only add a personal experience, that in the Old CAF (or Classic CAF?), I was easily able to mentally ignore specific posters. I once joked that I didn’t need the forum’s mute/ignore function because the mute function in my head worked just fine.

In recent years, however, I have a harder time doing that. Perhaps it’s me, or maybe it’s the different methods of forum moderation. The old moderators were more active and effective, I think.
 
The thread is a bit of a mystery to me.
Yeah, I had that thought too. I am participating in this thread, as I do many, but wonder about the moment when an OP says to themself “hey, I need to make a thread about this!”
 
Last edited:
I still don’t understand why you don’t like it. What do you care if I put someone on ignore? What affect does it have on you if I use the feature? There are more ways to ignore someone than to use the Ignore feature.
I thought I explained it but perhaps it wasn’t clear enough.

Basically I’m generally against any action that shuts down conversation or debate. I have often found, whether it be in relation to my own posts or even reading the debates or discussions of others, not just here but on social media, that people often get blocked, or muted etc. far too easily. I believe these tools are overused. In my opinion a ‘block’ or an ‘ignore’ is essentially a way out of a debate. The functions often get used (in my view) when people disagree or simply do not to like what somebody else has said. They can’t handle the debate on the issue, so they block/ignore them.

It isn’t that I particularly ‘care’ if you put me or someone else on ignore (you said you wondered why I care), but, as one user called my thread, I actually find it slightly petty. Imagine an actual conversation with somebody in reality, face to face. Do you think it would be appropriate, or good manners, to suddenly ignore them mid way through a discussion because you disagree with their point of view, or even if they say something that annoys you? I don’t so. I think it would be more appropriate, if you really don’t want to continue the discussion, to end it in a polite and civilised way.

I have not been blocked by many people on the internet, but when I have, it has always been because they disagreed with my take on a certain topic. I never insult people personally or say anything vulgar in discussions. I found those reasons to block me very unjust. I have also seen twitter discussions I have not been involved in, where one side was blocked after a while, just when it was getting interesting. It always looks in those discussions like the side doing the blocking is losing the argument, so they block the other person, for an easy way out. In fact, one way people often work, when blocking, particularly on twitter, is to say the last word, then block you, so you can’t respond, even though much of what they have said is false and you might have a valid reply to give. They know you might have a good response, so they prevent that by blocking you.

Now of course I do understand people can feel they have valid reasons for blocking or muting people, but as I said, I just think they are much too quick to do it. And again, why should I care if somebody blocks me you might say? Well, if we are having a back and forward debate on something and then you suddenly hit mute or ignore on me, it’s like you’ve just got up angrily and left the table. I just don’t think it’s the way to go.
 
Continued

I also find ignoring somebody completely, so you don’t see anything they write on the forum anymore, really odd and even un-Christian. How bad could whatever that person said on the forum be, for someone to decide ‘right, I never want to see anything that person writes again’?

These are my opinions, and when starting topics with a question (like this one) I also like to state my opinion in them, as part of the debate. I was however interested to see what others think about it.
I suppose some people are insulted by being told that others can live without hearing their opinion.
This isn’t a fair way to portray what I think, assuming it’s about me, but obviously feel free to think what you like.
Yeah, I had that thought too. I am participating in this thread, as I do many, but wonder about the moment when an OP says to themself “hey, I need to make a thread about this
I have explained my reason for creating this thread a couple of times now. Please scroll up for those.
 
People who ignore/mute others …

^^ Such a great function of this forum as it can prevent discussions deteriorating into insulting and unCatholic posting/sins against charity. It helps maintain peace not only here on the forums, but also for the one who does make use of this forum option - their inner peace and lowers stress levels.

It’s a brilliant feature of this platform.
 
I don’t have a problem with ignoring or muting others. Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom to have to listen.

What bothers me is there are no standards that are measurable that can get a person banned. Recently seeingclearly was banned. It seems he was banned just because the user was not liked. I would love for the moderators to create a measurable system in which a person can be banned.

It seems we have a few posters that are easily offended and will flag a user just because they disagree with a point of view.
 
If a person would block someone because they were having a debate and knew the other person had a valid argument they didn’t like, then they weren’t truly taking part in a debate. So it’s not shutting down conversation as much as not being honest as to what they wanted out of it in the first place.

I think you’re overly focused on debating and shutting it down vs carrying it on. I’ve never heard of anyone here on CAF blocking someone because they wanted to shut down a debate. I’ve muted people for a few reasons. Either I’m getting annoyed and in danger of being uncharitable, or a thread/user is taking away my peace of mind, or I want a break from seeing certain topics.

Speaking as an agnostic here, but I see nothing unChristian in blocking/muting/ignoring. If it stops anger or uncharitable comments, then I think it is a good idea. There’s no obligation to continue a debate or interacting with a user who rubs you up the wrong way. The smartest thing to do in those cases are to walk away, and if it takes muting or ignoring to help do that, that’s okay.
 
That’s an interesting reason I didn’t look at, doing it to prevent yourself from doing or saying something uncharitable to them.
 
It seems we have a few posters that are easily offended and will flag a user just because they disagree with a point of view.
Oh, that definitely happens. But the flags themselves don’t get anyone suspended or banned; the moderators review what was flagged, before taking action. And I’m sure they notice the flag-happy ones.
We also have to remember that we don’t necessarily know why someone was suspended or banned. Often the offending post(s) are deleted, and then people are looking at what’s left, saying, “well, they didn’t say anything that bad.”
 
nothing unChristian in blocking/muting/ignoring. If it stops anger or uncharitable comments, then I think it is a good idea. There’s no obligation to continue a debate or interacting with a user who rubs you up the wrong way. The smartest thing to do in those cases are to walk away, and if it takes muting or ignoring to help do that, that’s okay.
Exactly my point!

I’ve muted posters in the past because to me it was obvious that the option to agree to disagree wasn’t on the table, or their point kept being hammered and no ground would be given or valid point acknowledged - so it’d be fruitless to continue discussing. Unfortunately, there are some people who can’t accept this, and will continue to post to provoke a response.

So if there is an obvious personality clash, or a poster deliberately takes the role of devils advocate just to be contrary, then all these are reasons why I’d place that poster on mute/ignore - before I post something uncharitable myself and give into the provocation/anger. It is better to mute/ignore in these circumstances. As a Catholic I do try to avoid offending our Lord in anyway at all, so when things get like the examples above I make use of that function.

I’ve also stated on threads that I would be muting and not responding further so other posters would be aware that of this and not expect a response from me if they decided to comment on something I posted.
 
Exactly my point!

I’ve muted posters in the past because to me it was obvious that the option to agree to disagree wasn’t on the table, or their point kept being hammered and no ground would be given or valid point acknowledged - so it’d be fruitless to continue discussing. Unfortunately, there are some people who can’t accept this, and will continue to post to provoke a response.

So if there is an obvious personality clash, or a poster deliberately takes the role of devils advocate just to be contrary, then all these are reasons why I’d place that poster on mute/ignore - before I post something uncharitable myself and give into the provocation/anger. It is better to mute/ignore in these circumstances. As a Catholic I do try to avoid offending our Lord in anyway at all, so when things get like the examples above I make use of that function.

I’ve also stated on threads that I would be muting and not responding further so other posters would be aware that of this and not expect a response from me if they decided to comment on something I posted.
I completely agree. I’ve said it on other threads before, but one of the most important lessons I’ve learnt here on CAF is when debating is worth it, and when the best use of your time is to walk away. Muting/ignoring has certainly stopped me from getting into more endless debates where no-one was going to change their minds, and the only result on my part would be frustration and annoyance. It’s also made me more aware of threads which are interesting, thought-provoking and supportive; threads that are truly worth my time participating in. For having that result, muting/ignoring has only been beneficial for me.
 
Last edited:
I’ve said here before that I’m not a fan of what I might call “mute flouncing” – meaning those who get in a final jab and then announce they’re muting. It seems like these folks need to have a last word before getting out of dodge. I’ve never wasted time wondering what happened to someone who stopped posting on a thread so I don’t think making an announcement about muting is necessary and I think it’s actually detrimental to honest discussion. But muting in and of itself? Whatever floats your boat.
 
I’ve been here five years, and I had never put anyone on Ignore until a few weeks ago, when I blocked two posters who seemed to be deliberately pestering me. In one case it later turned out to have been a simple misunderstanding, but the other one is still making a nuisance of himself, though only occasionally now.
 
If I become irritated with a thread, I just stop reading and posting in it. I don’t have to go there, again.

Frankly, unless someone is being really abusive or obnoxious, I think it’s rude to mute or block them simply because one doesn’t agree with them. We all have a right to express our opinions, as long as we’re civil about it.

Just my two cents worth.
 
We also have to remember that we don’t necessarily know why someone was suspended or banned. Often the offending post(s) are deleted, and then people are looking at what’s left, saying, “well, they didn’t say anything that bad.”
Yes, and some offenders take it to PMs where we’d never see messages that break forum rules.
 
Frankly, unless someone is being really abusive or obnoxious, I think it’s rude to mute or block them simply because one doesn’t agree with them. We all have a right to express our opinions, as long as we’re civil about it.
👍 Totally acceptable when abusive, racist & damaging conversations take place. Reason requires us to at least listen to any opposing view where most level headed people can overcome or find compromise with opposition.

To happily involve yourself in a discussion that is in opposition to your own view is new exciting knowledge to some & for others it just destabilizes & puts in doubt their own views.

Their are many discussions on CAF that I personally don’t agree with but am always willing & interested in trying to understand others.
 
Last edited:
My only question is…if someone leaves a thread without mentioning that they’re muting it, I’ve always assumed they’ve either gotten tired of the thread…if I even noticed they left, or that they’ve signed off for the day. Since I dont really pay attention if someone stays or not, when I leave, I don’t announce it either. I suppose if someone wondered where I went, they’d PM me…:hugs:

I don’t mind it if they announce they’re muting, for me, I just never saw a need for it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top