New "Blocking" Request April 26, 2006 7:03 PM Subscribe
Warning: long, detailed post ahead. You have been warned.
there are greasemonkey scripts and extensions that this could be integrated into quite easily. I think it's probably more appropriate there.
I'd still like to see an askme-only timeout option.
posted by kcm at 7:09 PM on April 26, 2006
I'd still like to see an askme-only timeout option.
posted by kcm at 7:09 PM on April 26, 2006
NO SOUP FOR YOU, NEITHER.
Greasemonkey already has a blocking script available for MeFi. If you or anyone wants it, use it.
Otherwise get yer stinkin' butt-scratchin' claws off of MeFi's nicely naked comment stream. You're soilin' the doileys.
No nested threads. No comment karma. No voting. No adjustable views. No filters, no multithreading. No Digg, no slashdot, and for fuck's sake, no Kuro5hin or Plastic.
This idea has been beaten to death. NO.
There, I think that's clear enough, but just in case: NO, YOU FREAKISHLY WRONGHEADED GIMPHUMPING NUNSHITTER.
posted by loquacious at 7:20 PM on April 26, 2006
Greasemonkey already has a blocking script available for MeFi. If you or anyone wants it, use it.
Otherwise get yer stinkin' butt-scratchin' claws off of MeFi's nicely naked comment stream. You're soilin' the doileys.
No nested threads. No comment karma. No voting. No adjustable views. No filters, no multithreading. No Digg, no slashdot, and for fuck's sake, no Kuro5hin or Plastic.
This idea has been beaten to death. NO.
There, I think that's clear enough, but just in case: NO, YOU FREAKISHLY WRONGHEADED GIMPHUMPING NUNSHITTER.
posted by loquacious at 7:20 PM on April 26, 2006
think of it this way: this is an excellent chance to promote a new pony.
plus all this anonymous internet angst would have shot its load in a thread only half-deserving as this one.
posted by kcm at 7:29 PM on April 26, 2006
plus all this anonymous internet angst would have shot its load in a thread only half-deserving as this one.
posted by kcm at 7:29 PM on April 26, 2006
Hey, loquacious, I can't find that greasemonkey script you're talking about. Any idea where I can find it?
yes, I know I'm setting myself up for a joke there, but I really want that script
posted by davejay at 7:40 PM on April 26, 2006
yes, I know I'm setting myself up for a joke there, but I really want that script
posted by davejay at 7:40 PM on April 26, 2006
Did you, oh, try searching "Greasemonkey Metafilter" on Google, you JEWBURNING CHRISTPISSER HATESANDWICH? ;)
posted by loquacious at 7:44 PM on April 26, 2006
posted by loquacious at 7:44 PM on April 26, 2006
davejay, I know how a deleted comments script could work on the server side, but I don't think it will improve matters any, just make things worse (by giving a permanent home to the worst kind of contributions), which is why I've never implemented something like this before.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 7:50 PM on April 26, 2006
posted by mathowie (staff) at 7:50 PM on April 26, 2006
And keeping track of per-user killfiles would be too much of a db strain to do server-side. Use the greasemonkey script if you really want to hide someone from the site.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 7:53 PM on April 26, 2006
posted by mathowie (staff) at 7:53 PM on April 26, 2006
Blah blah blah I hate all of you blah blah blah derail derail derail.
For the record, I don't hate ALL of you.
posted by blahblahblah at 7:59 PM on April 26, 2006
For the record, I don't hate ALL of you.
posted by blahblahblah at 7:59 PM on April 26, 2006
Argh. Why were comments deleted in this thread? Especially the one about how that the snarking isn't always serious, and my reply to it?
Matt, what was the editorial point to that?
posted by loquacious at 8:14 PM on April 26, 2006
Matt, what was the editorial point to that?
posted by loquacious at 8:14 PM on April 26, 2006
Is there a greasemonkey script for ignoring certain users in the current thread only? I'm with davejay; it'd be a great idea. I personally haven't bothered to ignore anyone at the entire site, but there sure are moments when someone goes nuts in a thread, and it would be nice to make just that person in that thread disappear for a while.
posted by mediareport at 8:16 PM on April 26, 2006
posted by mediareport at 8:16 PM on April 26, 2006
Matt, what was the editorial point to that?
I removed all the unrelated stuff talking about the humungous post. I left the few on-topic ones.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 8:24 PM on April 26, 2006
I removed all the unrelated stuff talking about the humungous post. I left the few on-topic ones.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 8:24 PM on April 26, 2006
be told you drifters
the pruining shears are out, ow
how long will this last?
posted by edgeways at 8:50 PM on April 26, 2006
the pruining shears are out, ow
how long will this last?
posted by edgeways at 8:50 PM on April 26, 2006
I can't get the MeFi killscript to work, no matter how I try.
posted by Bugbread at 4:42 AM on April 27, 2006
posted by Bugbread at 4:42 AM on April 27, 2006
Metafilter: Blah blah blah I hate all of you blah blah blah derail derail derail.
posted by Johnny Assay at 6:19 AM on April 27, 2006
posted by Johnny Assay at 6:19 AM on April 27, 2006
I can't get the MeFi killscript to work, no matter how I try.
Which one? I've had good luck with Mondo Meta (thanks, mdevore).
posted by hangashore at 7:12 AM on April 27, 2006
Which one? I've had good luck with Mondo Meta (thanks, mdevore).
posted by hangashore at 7:12 AM on April 27, 2006
Killfiles never work. When you filter out a particular user, you don't filter out the reactions from others to that user, and so the noise they make sonars you the drivel the person you're blocking anyway. It's an exercise in futility.
posted by crunchland at 7:28 AM on April 27, 2006
posted by crunchland at 7:28 AM on April 27, 2006
For the record, I don't hate ALL of you.
I...
eh
forget it.
posted by eyeballkid at 7:42 AM on April 27, 2006
It's an exercise in futility.
Not really. The point isn't to erase all traces of the killee, it's just to make the thread more readable by eliminating the worst primary sources of bullshit. It can be quite effective and pleasant-making.
posted by mediareport at 7:49 AM on April 27, 2006
Not really. The point isn't to erase all traces of the killee, it's just to make the thread more readable by eliminating the worst primary sources of bullshit. It can be quite effective and pleasant-making.
posted by mediareport at 7:49 AM on April 27, 2006
I view MetaFilter with my web browser!
posted by antifreez_ at 11:38 AM on April 27, 2006
posted by antifreez_ at 11:38 AM on April 27, 2006
Someday, I hope to be as wildly insulted by loquacious as davejay. It'd be an honor, I think. Cause I've never heard of a nunshitter before.
posted by disclaimer at 12:42 PM on April 27, 2006
posted by disclaimer at 12:42 PM on April 27, 2006
I've never heard of a nunshitter before.
Really? It's not like nuns grow on trees, you know.
posted by eriko at 3:41 PM on April 27, 2006
Really? It's not like nuns grow on trees, you know.
posted by eriko at 3:41 PM on April 27, 2006
I could be vapid and request a global "block this user" feature
Or, you could be practical and request a "for Christ's sake, unblock my anus. Someone. Anyone" feature.
Jesus Mohammed Christ, dude. Get a life, eh?
posted by Decani at 5:11 PM on April 27, 2006
Or, you could be practical and request a "for Christ's sake, unblock my anus. Someone. Anyone" feature.
Jesus Mohammed Christ, dude. Get a life, eh?
posted by Decani at 5:11 PM on April 27, 2006
"NO, YOU FREAKISHLY WRONGHEADED GIMPHUMPING NUNSHITTER."
Thanks, you turkey. i just spit coffee everywhere.
posted by drstein at 11:14 AM on May 1, 2006
Thanks, you turkey. i just spit coffee everywhere.
posted by drstein at 11:14 AM on May 1, 2006
« Older Can we have pictures of ourselves? | pony that automatically shoves extremely long FPPs... Newer »
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
I could be vapid and request a global "block this user" feature, but this wouldn't be appropriate; certainly a person derailing one thread can easily be a person contributing significantly to the next, and it would be a shame to globally block them everywhere for a single transgression. Also, the server would likely have a terrible time keeping up with the effort of looking up and parsing the comments for every page served. Completely impractical.
Instead, I'd like to suggest a feature that allows easy sorting of the aforementioned wheat and chaff on a non-permanent, per-thread basis, and an implementation of the feature that would place all of the processing effort onto each individual user's machine.
FEATURE
A temporary and instantly reversible block on a specific user's comments, that works only in the current thread, and resets after you navigate away from the page.
Unlike a global user ban, this would only hide (or reveal, if previously hidden) a user's comments for a given thread. By default, all comments would always be shown, so it would be up to each user to decide "this person is (or these persons are) annoying me so much in this thread that I can't easily skip their comments -- so it is worth it to me to take action to hide them."
For instance, I might be in a thread that's fascinating, but there's also a huge derail going on, and my eyes are starting to bleed. As I read, I could click the block link for each user participating in the derail (as I encounter each), and so this...
Becomes this:
Much nicer.
IMPLEMENTATION
A comment typically has this code structure:
First, wrap the entire comment in a user-specific, but unstyled, class:
Next, add on two more tags: one to indicate the text, and one to indicate a "blocked user" message:
In your style sheet, the class .blockedmessage is set to display: none, while the .commenttext class is unstyled.
Now, write a small javascript function that accepts a user's name, and does this:
Finally, put a link in the smallcopy portion of the comment, adjacent to the "flag this post" link perhaps, that passes the username to the function.
And now, with a simple click, all of the user's comments for this thread -- and this thread only -- would be hidden, and another click would bring them back. If the user leaves the thread and comes back, all of the comments are restored.
If you decide to implement this, but don't have the time, I'll be happy to write the actual javascript for you.
DOWNSIDE
Well, there are two downsides:
1. if a person really, really didn't like another user, this would allow them to set up their own local style sheet to keep that user's comments hidden all the time. This is probably against the spirit of Metafilter, but at least it wouldn't impart any load on the server (that is, no databases of blocked users to look up with each page served.)
2. if a person has style sheets turned off, or runs their own local customized sheet, the "blocked comment:" text would always be visible. The quick fix is to pull that part of the implementation, but then users will need to remember that they blocked a specific user's comment. This shouldn't be too hard to do, given that the blocking is done on a non-permanent, thread-by-thread basis...so they'd likely have blocked within the last few minutes.
---
I realize this is a long, detailed request, and that it may be rejected instantly for reasons that I have failed to forsee. Nevertheless, I felt it was worthwhile to bring it up, and as long as I'm bringing it up, you probably prefer details to a simple "Hey, I wanna block Faint Of Butt! Put in blocking!" request.
posted by davejay at 7:05 PM on April 26, 2006