But no moderators or admins, you cant prevent them from commenting or viewing your threads. could work like this > Have an option in the thread called "Block List"

Click it and it brings you to a box, type in the user name of the person you want to block. Separate each username with quote marks or a space. The blocked person will either be unable to comment on your thread or unable to view it at all.

The idea is good but i prefer Black List <.<

Good idea, I like this very much.
If a person on your blacklist tries to post in your thread, they are simply unable to. I've never seen that feature in any forum I've ever used, it seems like it would be a good idea.

I agree, this is a good idea.

EDIT: I take it back, this is a bad idea. Devas has a good point. It'd be too easily abused by people who were mad at a certain user. It would be unfair to the user they are trying to block since if that user were actually doing anything wrong, it would be the forum moderators responsibility to punish them.

Way to undermine debates...

exemple: Let's prevent every pro-griefing person to post on the anti-griefing thread and every anti-griefing person to post ont he pro-griefing thread, etc

What if I made a thread that said how bad of an idea this is and put everyone who disagrees on my blacklist? That way, only my point gets across.

Also: that'd encourage multiple accounts on the forum.

The pro's far outway the con's, also a mod would be able to remove and add people to blacklists, to prevent blacklist abuse.

Are you kidding? Do you realize what you're doing?
You're going to prevent great ideas from emerging, and the truth to be revealed, just because you have petty forum issues with other people!

There's still no point to having blacklists other than "STOP LIKING WHAT I DON'T LIKE". It is unfair to exclude someone from a thread because you feel like it.

@سيروا تقودو يا ولاد القحا

Explain how this would prevent ideas emerging?

@SLAYER,

If I dont want someone to comment on my threads, to talk to me, then I should have the right to stop them from coming over and interrupting my thread, to be an asshole.

Or you can put on your big boy pants and ignore them instead of making a bunch of pointless threads. You've created 2 threads so far that promote hatred towards a member of the community and you just triple posted. I think you're the bad guy here.

One forum I was on had something along these lines, but it was an ignore function that made it so it hid their posts. It was very ineffective, you could choose to view the post, and people would comment back to the blocked post so to know what was going on you'd HAVE to read their post.

All of this could be averted if the administrators were simply not so lenient. Giving people 5+ warnings before any real punishment ensues doesn't set a good example for new members, who think they can get away with all the trolling they want.

Have you seen this feature on other forums?

It's a public forum, when you post something, it's public.

"YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!"

The administrators aren't lenient at all. Remember how they were back then when we didn't have rules? ;)

how about we just have the listed people be blocked to the creator only

-10 points to OP. You gotta have freedom of speech on the threads. If you want a private conversation, use PMs.

I support this 100%.

These forums aren't a democracy.

This is a bad idea, it would quickly back fire. Say someone is publicly attacked by false statements, then you block them when they try to defend themselves. It would cause serious issues the moment it happens.

>block someone

>provoke and talk shit while they're powerless

And this thread was going well until Devas dropped in.

No. We aren't China.

I'd imagine that the feature would be useful for takin' out trolls.

But, well, I think it's a tad too restrictive overall.

The only people that would open a thread just to talk shit about somebody are the people we don't need on these forums.

@camel
I am chinese and in china
I am offended.

Then again, sometimes people lose their cool. An outlet for strong emotions against someone is immature, but the idea of not allowing people to protect themselves in a thread is not right.

In any case like that, Drewgon, the person is likely flamebaiting/trolling anyway, and responding to it would be detrimental to yourself and just make you look bad.

The best case scenario is if obvious trolling/flamebaiting were punishable by temporary banishment from the forums.

"Say someone is publicly attacked by false statements, then you block them when they try to defend themselves..."

Why does one need to "defend" themselves online? Let the mods handle it.

If you're so shallow as to allow someone flaming you online to actually get to you, you probably need to shut your computer off and go get some sun.

Well this IS the Internet. Flaming/ Trolling/ Insults in any way should NEVER be taken seriously here. :/

Forums and the internet alike are/is a place for people to talk as a collective. Once you grant that sort of power to general users (not saying they're any less valuable to the community of course), you open a can of worms where it will only fuel more problems. People will obviously block users from commenting on their threads, which will lead to others becoming personally offended/mad at the original poster for doing so. This could possibly (more than likely) lead to alt-accounts being created for the sole purpose of attempting to bypass those restrictions.

Along with the obvious lengths users will go to in order to bypass this kind of restrictions, keep in mind that not all discussions are passive. Whether this is intended by the original poster varies. Debate is good (when done maturely, which is wishful thinking on a public internet forum). If you only permit certain users to discuss your topic, chances are there won't be much debate and when that happens, things tend to get stale.

I am personally a very anti-censorship advocate so I may be a bit biased towards this whole thing, but that's just my input. Blocking users from posting should be a method that should be exposed purely to administrators for the sake of keeping the forums in the best shape they possibly can in my opinion. Granting the power of censorship to everyone is not a good way to compensate for where administrators and moderators fail to handle situations, or miss them entirely.

The forums are a community. The community is made of people. Those people are human beings (though some may claim the contrary for trolls). People have feelings and are likely going to be offended or feel offended by something and will attempt to defend themselves and their views accordingly. Once you start taking that right away, it only causes more problems and gives the community a bad vibe. Distributed power doesn't mean less conflict.

I don't see anything like this happening. The internet is full of debate, conflict, and trolls. Censorship isn't a valid form of justification to try and prevent these things. Power like that should be left to a selected few who will oversee the community in it's entirety and deal with queries provided by users according in a mature and reasonable manner, not based on personal grudges.