Blocking and ignoring users

[DarkroomTaker]

On 10/5/2021 at 7:41 PM, DarkroomTaker said:

There are some pics I dont wish to see and users I dont want to be involved with in any respect for reasons I dont want to get into here. Can the block user function block their gallery pics when I block them??

Blocking a user, obviously does not work when you can see pics in gallery and even documents uploaded that I do not wish to see. Even when reported nothing changes.

[hntnhole]

On 8/22/2020 at 2:34 PM, DarkroomTaker said:

I see this site is great for expressing oneself and fetishes and fantasies and each to their own.

Hear Hear !!  That's why I joined up.  I happen to like a different posts, and enjoy responding to them.  I've even created a few posts.  The rub comes though, when some member promulgates non-caring behavior, no concern for the greater good, etc.  I'll reply for a while, and when met with nothing but recalcitrance, close-mindedness, argumentative stuff, I just don't read that thread anymore.  Only recently did I decide I'd had enough of one to actually block the (I presume) guy.  

This is, it seems to me, a very comprehensively conceived website.  There are separate areas for discourse on virtually every subject related to barebacking, and those that don't interest me I simply don't read.  More, rather than get into political issues, I write almost daily on a political blog, and I sharpen my fingers in the pencil sharpener before I even log onto that blog.  On BZ. I try much harder to understand/share perceptions, stuff I've done sexually, etc. etc. I do appreciate the political section though.  Sometimes though, it's hard to resist offering countering viewpoints to guys that simply will not have the courtesy to consider other viewpoints.  

While prior posts/replies from the blocked guy are still there, I don't have to read them.  This site is full of all kinds of interesting material, and that's why I'm here.  

It's all about Cock/Hole/Sperm

[BootmanLA]

4 hours ago, DarkroomTaker said:

Blocking a user, obviously does not work when you can see pics in gallery and even documents uploaded that I do not wish to see. Even when reported nothing changes.

This has been a point of discussion before in similar contexts. For instance, if I block "UserX" I don't see his posts on any forum. But if someone responds by quoting "UserX"'s post, I see whatever he posted. And if "UserX" updates his profile status statement, that appears in the right-hand column list of most recently updated profile statuses (it's not smart enough to only pull the 5 most recent *that I'm not blocking*). And so on.

Unfortunately, most of this is just limitations of the software RawTop licensed to run this forum on. Without access to the source code, it's probably not something that can be improved easily.

[rawTOP]

On 11/30/2021 at 11:25 PM, BootmanLA said:

Unfortunately, most of this is just limitations of the software RawTop licensed to run this forum on. Without access to the source code, it's probably not something that can be improved easily.

Take out the word "easily" and you're 100% correct.

[ohmalewhore]

So glad that this thread exists. Really has helped me "lock up" a group of people who seem to love to hear themselves rant, hate, bloviate and just act like they own the place - probably because each one has been doing this for a while and thinks that high rank grants them some prestige or something. So thank you - my notifications are much more quiet now without 20 extra ones from about 6 blowhards.

[ErosWired]

What makes that funny is that you don’t seem to realize that the function isn’t like blocking someone on Grindr - just because you can no longer see someone’s posts here doesn’t mean they can’t see yours. It just means you won’t be able to tell when somebody says something about something you wrote that you might have wanted to defend. This is the equivalent of just sticking your fingers in your ears and going LALALALALA every time someone says anything you don’t like.

Everyone would like to be able to say anything he wants without fear of contradiction or consequence, but any responsible participant in public debate has to be willing to face the reaction his words provoke, for good or ill. If you dismiss all response, then you can expect others to dismiss whatever you say.

But you do you - after all, you’re not going to see this anyway.

[Guest]

On 6/13/2019 at 7:57 AM, rawsatyr said:

Thanks! So I have found the tool that says: "blocking (prospective) members whose content I don't want to see". More importantly though, how can I keep a HYPOTHETICAL member from seeing my content if I see he DISLIKES it for no apparent reason. Nothing 'controversial' discussed, just negativity-out-of-the-blue the way you discover birdshit on an otherwise LIKED, freshly washed car, lol  Think of prospective BLOCKING as avoiding ANGRY BIRDS that are 'not of your feather'! LOL

Personally I see a lot of content that freaks me out and makes me cringe but I don't mark it as DISLIKED. Live and let live, however selfish or (self) destructive! To keep it all fun and games - Inquiring minds want to know for FUTURE REFERENCE! 

Agreed. I don’t quite understand the dislike button. In a community of marginalized individuals it just seems like a tool to indiscriminately shame people whose particular fetish you might not agree with. If it’s reportable, report it, otherwise “if you don't have something nice to say, don’t say anything at all” should be the rule.

There is also an uncomfortable power dynamic in that only certain people (not sure at what level) can use the reactions, so such a user can shame newer members with the dislike button with impunity.

I’m concerned that some newer users are afraid to post for this reason and simply lurk rather than contribute. That and the site isn’t optimized for mobile devices. For many,  mobile devices are the only way to interact with the site as their computers are the property of their employer or are shared within a household. It’s easily on a mobile device to mid-post and incur violation points.

I understand for the seasoned it may seem straight forward, but it can be quit nerve-wracking for the less seasoned. It’s hard enough putting oneself out there without the penalty of the dislike reaction.

Unless there is a compelling reason to have a dislike reaction, I believe it stifles community. Can it be done away with?

Many thanks,

Scott

 

[seekingversatility]

Within the bounds of T&Cs, each individual user is grangted access. A diverse body of equals may choose  to post, reply, engage, and interact with others in any number of equally unique modes of personal expression.

Free expression isn't absolute. Not in the Bill of Rights and not online. All content is subject to admin and mod approval. Stay jn bounds to maintain the privilege of access. Go out of bounds to face consequences.

Access for users does not include a any guarantee. No one is obligated to view,  respond, or like. The zone is a private forum. Parliamentary procedure, formal debate, and 1A rights are for citzens.

We're users with limited privileges playing in a sandbox with boundaries. Nobody is obligated to play with us.

Terms and conditions apply. Coupons expire. No return without receipt. An American's right to free speech does not include the right to a listening audience.

 

 

 

[Guest]

On 2/27/2022 at 5:41 AM, ErosWired said:

This is the equivalent of just sticking your fingers in your ears and going LALALALALA every time someone says anything you don’t like.

I am now picturing people here literally - like in literally literally - doing this. 🤣😂

[Guest]

5 hours ago, seekingversatility said:

right to free speech does not include the right to a listening audience

Hear hear !

[hntnhole]

11 hours ago, GaypingHole said:

Unless there is a compelling reason to have a dislike reaction, I believe it stifles community. Can it be done away with?

I try not to use the 'dislike' response much at all.  There are occasions within a thread however, when some guy proves intractable in his discourse - almost like throwing word-hand-grenades at others with whom he disagrees.  If that happens, I just skip reading those submissions, and read/respond to other, less antagonizing guys thoughts.  

I've only used the block-function once; and I haven't seen any of his mess since.  Unfortunately, there are some folks that simply insist on uncouth behavior, but fortunately there are only a handful of them, and easily denied attention.  All of that said, I think the "thumbs down" is useful, when used sparingly, and I hope it remains, since I don't think some little doo-dad possesses the power to "stifle" the exchange of ideas, perceptions, or thoughts.  We use the "thumbs up" doo-dad far more often than the thumbs down anyway, which I find most appropriate.  

Thanks for your thoughts.

[DarkroomTaker]

I like the block button and use it. Sometimes it stops a reaction I dont need to give on reflection.

You cant like everyone for one reason or another, its a great function.

[Guest]

11 hours ago, hntnhole said:

We use the "thumbs up" doo-dad far more often than the thumbs down anyway, which I find most appropriate.  

I agree, using the 👍 more than the thumbs down 👎🏻 button is most appropriate. But using the 👎🏻 without any context is meaningless and adds no value to the forum. As with most critique if you appreciate something and have nothing to add to improve it a 👍  makes sense. If you don’t like something that means you feel it can be improved upon in your opinion or that you disagree with it. That deserves feedback. If one isn’t willing to give the feedback then don’t react and move one. To do otherwise seems like general bitchiness. I posted in support of someone who enjoys sucking on an anus when rimming and it was disliked. Why, was it my support of someone who enjoyed a fetish? Am I not supposed to express that support? Does he not like the original poster and doesn’t want others to?

if we edit something on here we are required to say why. If we dislike something I think we should also be big enough to say why.

[DarkroomTaker]

Although  i have previously replied. I am actually wondering what is the purpose of this thread? Either use the functions or dont, block or dont block, react or dont react.

TBH, who cares??

Edited July 2, 2022 by DarkroomTaker
Started war and piece

[seekingversatility]

1 hour ago, DarkroomTaker said:

Although  i have previously replied. I am actually wondering what is the purpose of this thread? Either use the functions or dont, block or dont block, react or dont react.

TBH, who cares??

Sometimes the purpose of a thread (strums ukelele)...  

Is an avenue or outlet to simply be. To vomit the buffer and reclaim brain space for stmulants and toys and slings and long deep creamy slurping three-hour makeouts with fully cunted asslips. Repeatedly.

Every blog, all the feels, common qualities, questions, obstacles, solutions unites this community of cum-craving party pigs whose diversity enriches our brotherhood. (crescendo, cue the chorus, cue pin spot)

If those among us catch filthy loads, does the zone not rejoice in shared abundance of a juicy unread felching thread? Ave and woof! Woof and ave!

Raise your neigbors cock if you have been personally victimized by Regina George.

Spakest thou your truth, bend over, turn around, drop the pants so you can show off that hungry hole. Then trust fall into a hot tub full of lube. Then brunch.

Fin.