especially for reviews. (like my srcoi review.)
it would be so greatly appreciated by me and the readers of my reviews.
i have fat fingers and a dim mind sometimes and it seems seri doesn’t help and sometimes sabotages my efforts.
maybe have the edit feature available for an hour or a day after the review first posts...
Smash that Edit Button!
my latest review on spearmint rhino city of industry I had cleaned up nicely prior to hitting the submit button. I don’t understand what happened but when it posted it has the errors in it.
The hell with an edit button we need to restore the block ;)
A lot of other websites do allow for editing. One sc website in particular (in the Los Angeles Area) has removed the edit feature for reviews because of some disgruntled members throwing a temper tantrum and erasing their reviews and replacing it with just a dot. so I understand what you’re saying. it’s also my observation that nobody has removed their review for quite a while after first posting it and having a chance to edit it. seems the time for pulling such a move (as to remove a review) is many months down the road.
before that site removed the edit feature I utilized it quite often to sometimes add to the review and smooth it out.
that’s why I suggest a edit feature to be available for a period of time such as an hour or maybe a day. perhaps I’m asking for a lot because it’s a programming nightmare.
i usually don’t keep somebody on block or ignore anybody too long. (even sjguy.)
I'd agree that editing after the fact would be a bad idea but being able to edit within a specific time frame of your review being posted is fair. Also the ability to preview before submitting might improve the quality of reviews.
25,
Dat because u dont mak misteakes?
I can't allow editing once something is posted.
@founder look at what’s up we need the block feature it’s the only way to stop this insanity
25, just use ignore.
I don't like silencing voices.
I agree with 25. I'd like to see the Block back also. I put IceyDodo on Ignore. I don't see his comments, but he sees mine. He can insult me and make fun of my comments. If I have him on Ignore, then I don't know to defend myself.
I ( and a bunch of others ) want that dipshit silenced.
^ It's not how you defend yourself he, just posts shit n shit thats fabricated out of whole cloth, then he takes what you say and tries to spin it in a complete, falsehood. @founder apparently enjoys the conflict, else something would be done about it. I'm sure it's dougster, based on his constant posting.
+1 for the block. Sooner or later, trolls are going to stop being on their (relatively) best behavior and will start firebombing threads again. Why leave to door open for that?
Who is silenced by this? Does a single thread block prevent a troll from posting his own viewpoints in his own threads? Or in places where he is not blocked? He can even bump his own threads over and over if he doesn't want them buried.
Sorry, but I just don't get how this is any heavy handed form of censorship. Indeed, IMHO this was a very surgical and restrained approach to the issue.
But I agree on the edit issue. What point is there to a club review approval process if someone can just go in after and change what he posted?
^ actually in a way it can be said that not allowing the blocking of certain posters is just another form of censorship, it seems that the rights of those people are being protected at the expense of the majority, that want the ability to have a civil conversation without some flame thrower dropping a molotov cocktail in the middle of a conversation. Seems to me that their poor behavior earns them rights the rest of us don't have.
As everyone else above said, I don't get how the block feature is silencing anyone. The offending party is still free to start their own threads and post in any conversation where they haven't been blocked. And if a person is blocked by numerous people then I think that speaks to that person's ability to post amicably.
Ignore is also ineffective when you can't see a posters content but they can see yours and respond. As mentioned before, once other folks start responding to the ignored person the conversation becomes a broken, incoherent mess for the person using ignore.
For the short time the block feature was in effect folks could moderate their own discussions by simply removing people who wouldn't stay on topic and posted solely to disrupt the conversation.
I must be missing something. Why would someone feel obliged to "defend" themself against nonsense posted by someone they're otherwise willing and able to ignore? Grow the fuck up, and F.I.D.O. (Forget It - Drive On).
Founder said "I can't allow editing once something is posted."
What about saving a review as a draft before being posted for review? I believe we can do this already for articles.
Founder said "25, just use ignore. I don't like silencing voices."
It has been argued here and in other threads by numerous users that the block feature does not silence or censor anyone. And we don't understand your position that it does.
It's your sandbox. It just feels like you prefer the acrimony for some inexplicable reason.
C.M.I. - I always type the text of a review on word pad and then cut and paste. This protects my work if the site crashes while I'm trying to post.
Shadowcat... I do the exact same thing. But that seems to be an extra step that many here don't want to take. Even if it is really easy.
Too many people on here want it their way...
I like the "save a draft" idea. Not sure how difficult that programming of that is. That would still keep people from changing things once they get officially posted. But would also allow us to look at it to see typos and mistakes. I hate auto-correct and don't realize sometimes that it has changed what I have typed.
w.r.t. writing reviews - it makes much-more sense to write them offline where they can be saved and restored - but the draft idea is a good one if for anything else maybe some kinda mishap during submittal
Seems making mods post approval is not a good idea - one could always use the comment section to clarify stuff.
I'm with Founder - no one should be silencing anyone else and the previous full block did that no matter how you wanna spint it.
I don't see this obsession with the trolls - I don't care for them either but easy for me to just ignore them by scrolling past their comments or just using the Ignore feature - some on here have been arguing with SJG for years which is looney.
Block did not allow people to post to certain threads. That silences them.
I'm more of the mindset that you can ignore, but not silence.
If someone on the interwebs hurts your feelings, then you need to ask God for a new set of feelings, because the ones you got suck.
It's your sandbox. We're just playing in it.
Hurt my feelings please @founder that’s a load of snark and you know it, that kind of behavior will get that jackass thrown out of any club in any town, and probably get you an ass kicking as well, but yeah it’s your sandbox you’re enabling bad behavior I guess that’s your right.
Well, this should be fun. 😀
Romper, Stomper, Bomper, Boo... Tell me, tell me, tell me do Magic mirror, tell me today Did all my friends have fun at play?
Too many PLs are used to getting their way in SCs where they are used to controlling the situation - and seems they wanna carry that same attitude to TUSCL (my way or the highway, e.g. you can't post in my thread).
Founder is being consistent in that he's always had a hands-off approach w.r.t what's posted except in rate circumstances.
25, there are lots of other sandboxes on the internet. Go play in them.
I'm, for one, am sick of voices being censored because somebody disagrees with them. So in this sandbox, we can call each other names, and scream our opinions as loud as we want.
On a side note, why does it seem that is always the progressive left that wants to be able to silence voices? Or am I just imagining that?
I assume Founder is a Libertarian
🙂
"On a side note, why does it seem that is always the progressive left that wants to be able to silence voices? Or am I just imagining that?"
Progressive left here and I just love the way the site is implemented right now. Don't change a thing.
...yes I think it's your imagination.
Yeah the hurt feelings thing is a weak cop out. Fact is it is your sandbox so doesn't matter how much we lobby. I'm just wondering what brought about this change of heart? The feature actually did help certain discussions stay on track and remain civil. For that short time it was almost like a regularly moderated forum where certain abusive behavior is dealt with accordingly.
Trippy rules on this forum. We have a guy talk openly about rape and infecting sex workers with HIV. Yet allowed to stay. When told about this account, we got the same advice from the man in charge: use ignore. tuscl.net
Ignore as it is is a worthless feature right now, for the same reasons countlessly explained here and in numerous other threads.
I see so this is a left, right thing funny I don’t consider myself progressive left, but fine I gotcha drift.
and yeah you’re just imagining that
TFP, just an FYI. "Ignore" was around long before it became "block". It was a bad decision I made to go to "block". There was no change of heart. I've always felt that people should be allowed to say what they want. And if they say things that bother you, then just ignore them.
Whatever happened to "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me"?
Yeah that's another thing, what the fuck is up with all the political shit when arguing? I'll admit I'm the least political person probably on the entire planet. I could give a shit about it, since I believe even if I knew every little thing about it wouldn't change a goddamn thing.
Yet folks like Icey and most recently Founder seem to label folks by their political orientation despite not knowing much of shit about them besides what they post on here.
When using a block, that person thinks he's making a decision for himself, but he's not - he's making it for the entire board when deciding that person can't post on a particular thread
TFP, I made no assumption about your political stance. I was simply stating an observation.
“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.”
Thomas Jefferson
founder said "On a side note, why does it seem that is always the progressive left that wants to be able to silence voices? Or am I just imagining that?"
Yes, you are. And I'm not part of the progressive left. As far as I can tell, both ends of the political spectrum love free speech when it's the speech they love, but their dedication to those free-speech ideals develops a pronounced wobble when it comes to ideas and initiatives that they dislike.
Also, why is a straightforward dialogue about discussion forum functionality / management being steered towards hurt feelings and partisan politics?
This discussion forum is open for all. That's the functionality I'm looking for.
It brings me great joy to be able to watch skibum and sjg go head to head.
@Founder apparently for a certain very vocal minority you may need to implement a new forum option:
I was also in favor of the block
...but I am still entertained by this thread anyways. Smash that like button.
That is awesome WillMunny
lol!
Blocking the trolls doesn't get rid of them. Not feeding them does.
You guys keep bitching about trolls, but keep feeding them.
Dolfan you're not paying attention. These are different trolls here. You could ignore them all you want and they'll still make 10 threads, bump 5 old ones, and comment on every other thread, usually off topic. Then all it takes is one person to engage them to make the thread topic forgotten. You'll never get everyone to not deed the trolls. They're like weeds. They only need one good rainstorm to take over.
Dolfan said "Blocking the trolls doesn't get rid of them. Not feeding them does."
You understand that the vast majority of people who use this site do not have loads of impulse control... right?
I have never seen the "don't feed the trolls" admonishment work in any discussion forum ever. On TUSCL it's an absolute non-starter.
and my fat fingers... i just looked at my ignore list and saw two members names on there that somehow i accidentally ignored.
like I’ve said before are use the ignore feature (and block when it’s available) very little. sometimes I’ve used a feature just to tighten up the comments but I don’t leave it on as a general rule.
and on the contribution page of comments it would be helpful to have the title of the discussion, review, and article also visible in addition to the comment. and if somebody else has commented since my comment.
It really doesn’t matter founder has made his mind up so what ever we think it’s just a big fuck you to any one who disagrees with him. After all his sandbox his rules. Look forward to his full circle.
Twentyfive, you certainly are a whiny little bitch, aren't you?
^ way to defuse the situation
😄
not really founder just stating a fact, you can ignore me if you like, my feelings won’t get hurt
@ founder you are sort of reminding me of a joke I heard many years ago
So theres a monk gets initiated into a group and as a novitiate he takes a vow of silence , five years into his meditations the head monk calls him into the office and asks how are things with the caveat, he may speak only two words, so the monk thinks hard and says to the maestro, “food lousy” He returns to his cell and fives years later is called into the maestros office and again is offered the opportunity to speak two words, again he thinks it over, and utters”bed hard” then reruns to his cell. Five more years go by our monk devoutly maintains his dedication and remains silent, but the time passes, and five more years pass and again he’s called to the maestros office, this time he’s ready and immediately states “I quit” The maester hearing this immediately starts to agitate and remarks out loud” you ungrateful idiot, you’ve been here fifteen years and all you do is complain, complain, complain!
Founder said "Twentyfive, you certainly are a whiny little bitch, aren't you?"
You implemented functionality that a lot of people liked. You did that. Then you took it away. And then, when those people explain the benefits of the feature you implemented, it's suddenly not the debate and free expression that you say you value... it's whining.
"It brings me great joy to be able to watch skibum and sjg go head to head."
But perhaps less joyful when folks go head-to-head with you.
i’m a member of perhaps a half dozen website forums and I have noticed that each has its unique rules and guidelines that the creator and or owner implement. I might not agree with certain policy and/or make a suggestion to ‘improve the site’ but bottom line... it is their site.
^ "not really founder just stating a fact, you can ignore me if you like, my feelings won’t get hurt"
But he can't block you.
I may not agree with everything founder says or does but I'm amused by the way he says it and his curtness. Thank you for the sandbox founder
Allowing reviews to be edited after being published is potentially problematic.
But I think it would be useful to save a review as a 'draft' that you can revisit and edit before submitting for voting. I believe that functionality already exists for articles.