The Foe Feature

[loCAtek]

LOL I did call you gay boy, did you miss that?

My male girlfriends aren't so sensitive as you, no.

Fine. When we become "friends" you can call me whatever you want.

How about you hold your breath waiting for that to happen.

When have I ever requested that? ...But thX for acknowledging, that this isn't personal. However, you and others are making it out to be.

Scooter wants to make this sexual, that's on him.

It's no more "sexual" than if you were calling me "boy" if I were black. Wait, don't tell me, you have black friends who have no problem with that...

They have no problem with my calling them, 'coons', but you have no control over that.
Is that what bothers you?

That black folk are more accepted than you are? Just curious?

[Scooter]

Time for you to head to the fridge for another six-pack, isn't it?

[Sean]

Yeah Scoot, how DARE you be so sensitive to personal remarks and slurs!

Mind you, if you ave ever referred to a friend as a pisshead, beerhound, lush or anything of that nature then I guess certain inebriates have just made themselves fair game!

[loCAtek]

Ha so happened but yet, you can't answer?

[loCAtek]

Let's make this yet more about ye, shall we?

[Lord Jim]

I made my position about the Foe feature, and how I use it, quite clear when I put Andrew on it last June when the wheels fell off of his bus:

In the future, if I happen to see something that someone else quotes him saying that I find particularly vile, outrageous or dishonest, I will certainly feel free to comment on it. (As I have here. I do the same thing occasionally with the other two I have on ignore, Quad and rubato.) But there will no longer be any pointless back and forth.

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3159&p=40480&hilit= ... put#p40480


I don't put people on ignore to do them any favors, or to give them some sort of "free pass" for their behavior. They certainly don't deserve it.

I do it to make my life easier and my experience at this forum more enjoyable. Therefore, I will interpret how to use "ignore" and what it requires of me as I see fit , for my benefit, not theirs; I certainly will not pay any attention to what they think it should require of me. (If I had that sort of respect for their opinion, I wouldn't have them on foe in the first place.)

not wanting to read the words of another poster does not make one a coward. Again, an oaf might disagree with that...

Indeed, only an oaf could disagree with that...

Ignoring the posts of someone with an established record for intellectual dishonesty, and refusing to allow them to draw you into a pointless Death Spiral Samba isn't "cowardice"....

It's an exercise in good judgement....

But as I said, at least in my case, I don't do it with the intent of trying to do any favors for the person who has, through their behavior, earned a position on my foe list....

Recently, in a discussion Andrew was involved in, I noticed that a number of other folks were commenting on his use of dishonest tactics that I had myself had become all too familiar with; the very tactics that led me to put him on my foe list in the first place....

I felt perfectly free to comment on that, as well as to give my opinion on statements he made that others quoted...

And if that happens again, I will feel perfectly entitled to respond in exactly the same fashion.

And if there's anyone who doesn't like it, well, they know what they are free to kiss....

[dales]

I have no "foes" here nor any poster on "ignore".

I guess I just don't give a sh!t.

[Andrew D]

Lord Jim claims to ignore me -- a claim which is itself a lie -- simply because he is afraid to confront me.

[The Hen]

Thanks to Andrew D, I no longer ignore any poster.

Thanks to the Gob, I have the tools to deal with what I no longer ignore.

I have no idea about how far the Board can be tweaked with the Foe button.

I'll give himself a poke and bring this thread to his attention. However this weekend we are in Sydney with only my tablet to roam with, so any poking of different Board settings would probably be left best alone til we return to Canberra.

[Gob]

hi gang. As Hen says , we're in Sydders at the moment, having a fine old time. Just waiting to go out for the day. When I am back in the 'Berra, I will see what turnings can be made to the "ignore" feature.

In the meantime I suggest you ignore The obvious ttrolling as best you can, and as has been stated, delete any PM's without first reading, from anyone you wish to ignore.

[Gob]

Ps. Our room has Fox sport, it has 24 hr running cricket on it. Worth the trip up just for that.

Hatch met Alan Davies and got his autobiography signed last night, she's over the moon!!!!!

[Andrew D]

Oh and not wanting to read the words of another poster does not make one a coward.

Of course not.

But claiming not to want to read the words of another poster, responding to that other poster's words when one feels like it, and not responding when challenged by that other poster?

That makes one a coward. And a liar.

[Sean]

Dickhead! Read again and try and get your numb brain around what I posted about quoting ignored posters...

[loCAtek]

~meh, no one is consistent about using the ignore feature, for whatever excuse. That's why it's failing.

[Andrew D]

Dickhead! Read again and try and get your numb brain around what I posted about quoting ignored posters...

Yes, reading what you post does tend to numb my brain (an effect which some of my postings has surely had on others).

Yes, you suggested that if A is ignoring B, then B's postings ought to be invisible to A even when they are quoted by others.

And as far as I can tell, this:

But claiming not to want to read the words of another poster, responding to that other poster's words when one feels like it, and not responding when challenged by that other poster?

That makes one a coward. And a liar.

is not applicable to you.

Why would you ever have thought that it might be?

You may have noticed, however, that Lord Jim continues to insist that behaving that way is perfectly fine.

[Andrew D]

And because the subject of narcissism has been raised:

I do it to make my life easier and my experience at this forum more enjoyable. Therefore, I will interpret how to use "ignore" and what it requires of me as I see fit , for my benefit ...

(Boldface and italics in original.)

Of course the foe feature makes his experience here more enjoyable. He is free to troll without mustering the intestinal fortitude to confront.

Obviously, he could do that anyway. But the foe feature gives him an excuse. Exactly what he's always been looking for.

[Gob]

I have had rubato on ignore since this forum started, I have had Lo on ignore since she decided to give fill reign to her attention whore personality defect, it saves a great deal of heartache. If someone quotes them (and I do wish people would not,) then obviously I read what they have written. None of which usually gives me any hope for either of them contributing anything I would want to read in the near future.

But if Poster X quotes;

I'm posting all this dumb shit to get attention, look at me, look at me!!

I do wish you'd stop being such a shithead for a minute.

Then as I read Poster X's posts normally, I have to confront Lo's barge-arsed stupidity. If I feel it is worthy of comment or approbation, I do so.

[loCAtek]

Wow, right after he posts in my thread, that he says he's ignoring.


Hypocrisy-R-Gob, start using those tools that you claim are so great, anytime now. LOL


Well, I see he's relenting that he can't control me [that's a good start], but now it's YOUR fault that he can't control himself. Acknowledgement of lack of control, in the 'Acceptance of Loss' Chart, can't be far off.

[The Hen]

You didn't understand a word he just posted then?

[loCAtek]

Hen trying to hijack my responses/emotions again <sigh> So old...

I thought you were over this, no?


No. Control freakishness is hard to overcome. I understand.