Re: Requesting a new tag for PM posts

I'm thinking about how this is different from reaping. The differences I see between reaped and ignored are:

The original author continues to own the ignored node.
The original author can continue to update the ignored node.
It would be easier to get ignored than reaped. That is, the standards for that would be not as tight.

I'm not sure it's worth it for a relatively small change.

The Monastery is normally so very intelligent and respectful that I find it to be quite a shock when some knucklehead invades it and pollutes it. It can be hard to remember that fools have come before and departed and that the fool before me will likely soon be the fool behind me.

I'd be happy to have the ignorable flag, but only if creating it doesn't detract from time that might be spent on more important features. Deterring the occasional cretin doesn't seem worth much to me. They're already pretty deterred.

Comment on Re: Requesting a new tag for PM posts

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Requesting a new tag for PM posts by graff (Chancellor) on Oct 08, 2007 at 04:29 UTC
... only if creating it doesn't detract from time that might be spent on more important features. Deterring the occasional cretin doesn't seem worth much to me. To the extent that good information is still good months or years from now (and to the extent that Super Search has proven well worth the effort to set it up), I think there's more at issue than just the short-term goal of coping with jerks while they are in our face. Having an easier, less drastic means for skipping the noise would yield a lasting benefit. And it's not just a question of nodes posted by trolls; it's also the responses they get, whether well-intentioned and constructive or spiteful and vindictive, that have nothing to do with Perl or the given thread topic. I think the `<ignore>` tag by itself (without the special NodeReaper protocol) would be handy in any case, but I can't hazard a guess as to the effort required to set it up, and maybe that's not so much better than `<strike>` tags as to be worthwhile. Just an idea...	[reply] [d/l] [select]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^2: Requesting a new tag for PM posts
by graff (Chancellor) on Oct 08, 2007 at 04:29 UTC

... only if creating it doesn't detract from time that might be spent on more important features. Deterring the occasional cretin doesn't seem worth much to me.

To the extent that good information is still good months or years from now (and to the extent that Super Search has proven well worth the effort to set it up), I think there's more at issue than just the short-term goal of coping with jerks while they are in our face. Having an easier, less drastic means for skipping the noise would yield a lasting benefit.

And it's not just a question of nodes posted by trolls; it's also the responses they get, whether well-intentioned and constructive or spiteful and vindictive, that have nothing to do with Perl or the given thread topic.

I think the <ignore> tag by itself (without the special NodeReaper protocol) would be handy in any case, but I can't hazard a guess as to the effort required to set it up, and maybe that's not so much better than <strike> tags as to be worthwhile. Just an idea...

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]