The missing post could "appear" with something as subtle as a tiny gif or single letter, say if you came across
[...]
in a thread, you'd know it was a missing, MARCIE'd-out post, but there'd be no more than that.
Angel: He is dead. Technically, he's undead. It's a zombie. Connor: What's a zombie? Angel: It's an undead thing. Connor: Like you? Angel: No, zombies are slow-moving, dimwitted things that crave human flesh. Connor: Like you. Angel: No! It's different. Trust me.
'Destiny'
Buffistas Building a Better Board
Do you have problems, concerns or recommendations about the technical side of the Phoenix? Air them here. Compliments also welcome.
John H - Dec 26, 2002 6:33:07 pm PST #2329 of 10000
John H - Dec 26, 2002 6:33:40 pm PST #2330 of 10000
§ ita § - Dec 26, 2002 6:35:40 pm PST #2331 of 10000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
I think we should have the option. If I lose my cool and end up with 17 ENUFed posters (we need a practical cap), then I'll want to know which one I'm ignoring when. So maybe it's post ignored by thatperson postdatetime or nothing at all.
amych - Dec 26, 2002 6:37:33 pm PST #2332 of 10000
Now let us crush something soft and watch it fountain blood. That is a girlish thing to want to do, yes?
Okay, that's [edit: just having an ellipsis or the like] not that bad -- what I've seen discussed up until now was something more like a full set of post headers (not the right term, but, you know what I mean):
Joss, datestamp, post number, Mark, tagline
this post has been filtered
Which is way more than I want, when I've gone to the effort of filtering someone out rather than just skimming past them.
And, of course, apologies to Joss, whom I would (probably) never actually plonk.
John H - Dec 26, 2002 6:40:18 pm PST #2333 of 10000
Why not three options: Nothing at all, headers but no content, or my 'subtle' missing-post indicator, forming a link to read it if desired?
amych - Dec 26, 2002 6:45:30 pm PST #2334 of 10000
Now let us crush something soft and watch it fountain blood. That is a girlish thing to want to do, yes?
As I said, options good. But since I'm not the one doing the coding, I don't want to get demanding about "this is my personal preference so give it to me now!" either.
Michele T. - Dec 26, 2002 7:00:06 pm PST #2335 of 10000
with a gleam in my eye, and an almost airtight alibi
In all honesty, in all the time I've spent on Usenet, I never missed seeing any indication that some jerk whose posts I didn't want to see had posted!
§ ita § - Dec 26, 2002 7:03:01 pm PST #2336 of 10000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Gah.
I just realized, that as admins, we shouldn't ENUF anyone.
However, back in the day, I appreciated knowing when I was skipping, and when I wasn't, at least so that I could work out what I had missed on purpose, and what I'd let slip by me.
billytea - Dec 26, 2002 7:04:48 pm PST #2337 of 10000
You were a wrong baby who grew up wrong. The wrong kind of wrong. It's better you hear it from a friend.
Why not three options: Nothing at all, headers but no content, or my 'subtle' missing-post indicator, forming a link to read it if desired?
I'd vote for a stripped-down header, that is, something in between. Unless it's actually easier to code for leaving the header much as is. I would like to have the name of the filtered poster appear; on TT I had more than one person filtered, and the reasons differed somewhat from person to person.
But I think name of poster and missing-post indicator (by all means subtle) would be fine. Again, depending on ease of coding.
(Finally, even with the recent shenanigans on Firefly, I don't yet feel the need to filter anyone. By all means take this into account when according weight, or lack thereof, to my personal preferences.)
DXMachina - Dec 26, 2002 7:17:58 pm PST #2338 of 10000
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
I just realized, that as admins, we shouldn't ENUF anyone.
Yeah, I figured that out awhile back. Actually, this is the first guy I've ever felt strongly enough about to want to filter out his posts, mostly because I was afraid that if I tried to respond, I would lose my temper and post something unfortunate. The only guy I ever ENUFed back on TT was the fellow who always posted white text on a black background. Nothing to do with his content, just the way he presented it annoyed me.