[QoL] Forum needs a MUTE function

The forum software is called Discourse and, for some reason, it does not have the Ignore function. Blizzard is aware of that and I think they have looked into getting that added. I don’t know what the current status of the issue is though.

As for moderators vs trolls - the Mods are a team who cover every single Blizzard game, not specifically one title. They react to reports and review them vs the code of conduct. Trolls can be very good at skirting that grey line between causing drama and still following the rules. The old forum had the option to comment when reporting so you could point out a pattern of behavior to a mod. The new forums don’t :frowning:

I had only one person on Ignore on the old forums. One. I do agree that it really is a useful feature though. There are some people who are just not worth even reading. Being able to ignore them limits drama.

4 Likes

Hmnnn
Now you’ve got me wondering who
 (Not asking you to name, just wondering
) Two or three names come to mind
 :thinking:

I would likely get in trouble if I called out a name or discussed the current forum status of said person. We are not allowed to discuss moderation.

To make things worse, spamming the forums is actually encouraged and made beneficial by the Trust Level requirements.

1 Like

Oh, I know. That is why I specifically said I was not asking you to name


But I was curious
 There were a lot of “eligible candidates” on the old forums, and you have very thick skin (‘troll armour’)
 So it just kind of begged the question
which one
was sooooo out of line.

So yea, wasn’t laying a trap–let’s not have curiousity kill any cats (cheetahs) today
 :smile:

Making a ton of posts to get to TL3 is not true in consideration of how trust levels are determined.

  1. Must have replied to at least 10 different topics
  2. Must have received 20 likes, assuming that they have given 30 likes (really easy to give a like) :+1::hearts:

So if a person made 10 and only 10 posts and received 20 likes, they would have met their posting/like criteria.

1 Like

When quantity is favored over quality, it’s absolutely true.

Edit: I see now that I’m wrong on this. Thank you.

The minimum quantity is 10 replies. In terms of quality, the main thing for TL3 is to obey the CoC in Blizzards eyes and never be suspended. It is not a high bar until you get to the 100 day rolling average requirements. As Meteorblade noted , these are reading/viewing 500 topics and 20,000 posts which is quite high and in EU forum impossible.

The second point is about quality. Is it quality from your viewpoint, Blizzard’s viewpoint, or the forum as aa whole? Should we set the requirement to likes to make it a populairity contest? Is receipt of 500 likes enough?

It is my opinion that the TL3 requirements should be lower for the items that are 100 day rolling averages, most notably the number of topics/posts viewed.

1 Like

You are mistaken. The Trust levels encourage READING, the forums, not spamming posts. Posting a ton does not benefit you at all.

This :arrow_up::arrow_up::arrow_up::arrow_up::arrow_up:

2 Likes

My mistake. I didn’t read through it enough.

Thanks guys.

The trust levels encourage scrolling through threads without reading just to unlock the ability to make links to domains that should already be in the TL2 trusted site list.

1 Like

Not the brightest bulb on the tree, are you?

2 Likes

Were you standing in front of a mirror when you typed that? I’m perfectly capable of having a civil, rational conversation and a laugh with anyone.

Your entire post history (old and new) consists of you antagonizing & shooting people down every single time.

Pots & kettles, stones & glass houses, you know how it goes. :kissing_heart:

You claim it would be nice to be able to mute, yet you call me a whiner for requesting that same feature you would want. It’s called “self-pwning”.

So yep, my bulb’s brightness is fine, unlike yours.

Also can’t help but :laughing: after seeing the two people who “liked” your not-very-bright post. GRhornytoad and Steve, two of the most-likely-to-be-muted people on pretty much everyone’s list.

1 Like

Citation needed. QED

Fun fact: Even when there was ignore, none of the biggest fanboys of D3 seemed to ignore me. Pretty funny you suggest a feature that you yourself would likely not utilize. You just can’t help yourself.

Quite hilarious all this whining about bad faith and grey areas. Sounds like many feel that anything negative is automatically in bad faith even if it might be an honest opinion. In reality this is trying to defend a phoney right not to be offended in suggesting that a fanboy safe space be constructed.

In my opinion, the players psychotic and OCD enough to reach TL3 should in no way be allowed to do these things.

2 Likes

@Stone,
Had to give you a like. Not for the OCD part, but I am not sure what anmated gifs add to the conversation.

2 Likes

Even when the old forums had an ignore function I never used it because I’d much rather judge posts on their content than on who wrote them. Besides, if someone’s genuinely being offensive, I’d rather they get seen, reported and permanently removed than covering it up.

1 Like

Yeah well in a perfect virtual Utopian world, this wouldn’t be an issue.

Wasn’t too bad in the first couple weeks. I guess the mods were trying to impress us lol. Looks like they gave up on that soon afterwards.

and that is what i ask for years now, including his posts ofc.
-for sure, an OP himself must be able to protect his own thread this way.
-he doesn’t have to ‘react’ to improper posts, where his reaction can be flagged by the clickbaiters


yes, but only for the disliker.
-noone should be able to make a poster unseen for others.

no, that’s the big mistake: who claims if a post is valid. about 5-10 people on the forum, it seems. because those 5-10 are always the same that popup instantly in my threads and flag it to deletion if i keep posting, or they get it deleted anyway by breaking this CoC on-TOPIC off-OP rule:

‘Please remember to be kind and courteous on the forums.’
-i got informed that the reason for deletion doesn’t have to be the OP at all.