PEOPLE I HAVE ON IGNORE

I don't think I will hearing anymore from CrazyLady420 either- I told her off royally in PM.

FIXED.

I was an amimation student, and I want to go and get comic book training.
Why is that a big deal if I am into 'toons somewhat?

I'm wasting time posting everywhere. That's the whole point. What are you here for?

To get help and input.

Is there an "ignore" feature on this forum? On the now defunct Yahoo boards there was one where I used to relegate all the insensitive and cruel posters.

Yes. Click on someone's linked name at the start of their post and you will go to their profile. Ignore is an option just below the avatar.

IGNORE has only one negative. Whenever someone (Like Apisa), attempting to not be a prick, will quote and respond to some real nut (like JTT) and that just brings up some batshit line that JTT is posting.
Apisa then, in his effort to be fair, spends quality tyime telling JTT 'To get some help and /or treatment'" and that will be followed by several more similar requests. ALL that does is bring JTT up for inspection and to dispell doubts that he IS a batshit. (Something that 99% of people alredy know).

I appeal for universal ignore for that guy. He will then disappear into the void.


or not

I'm still waiting for that blocking option Robert was talking about. You can't see them, they can't see you, and maybe - just maybe, you won't see them quoted or listed as the most recent poster.

I await with baited breadth

Stop eating worms and minnows and that breath problem will clear right up.

I have a "d" innit squire.

Still not abated, even after readind this thingie:

"Sally, having swallowed cheese,
Directs down holes the scented breeze,
Enticing thus with baited breath
Nice mice to an untimely death. "

The expression is not "baited," it's "bated," as in abated without the first "a." The earliest citation appears to be from Snakeshit, in The Merchant of Venice in 1596. At least, that is, according to "The phrase finder" from the UK.

Indeed.

That's jokingly that I cited the above poem:

Seems like a very poorly thought out plan. It'd make sense if you, the blocker, can't see their post, or their message quoted or the blocked not listed as the most recent poster, but they, the blocked, can't see your post?!?!? Isn't this a form of involuntary censorship, because the site is attempting to prevent a particular viewpoint from being seen, without consent?
Unappealing and a bad business plan for an open forum, in my opinion.
Continuing with that line of thought, people might as well as start using elephant guns to kill gnats.

Well said!

I await with "baited breadth" was an attempt at being silly, like my Jim Nabors is Goy.

Iam trying not to blow my "knows" in public

Is there a mass debait here?

The site wouldn't be preventing anything. I would, and it's not about viewpoints; it's about obnoxious people. You might think of it as a conference call that blocks wiretappers.

From what you mentioned, say if I block you, not only can't I see any of your post, but you can't see any of my posts. That is what doesn't make sense, because it seems to serve no purpose other than spite. There is no point for such reciprocated obstruction is what I'm trying to get at - basically, involuntary censorship.
Am I understanding this correctly? (Your conference call/ wiretapper analogy is pretty bad analogy when comparing to an open forum)
Even if you're blocked, don't you want to have the freedom to see what your blocker is writing in an open forum? Personally, I'd like to have that freedom.