(Site is a graveyard - How can boards save itself?) Any update?

I have nobody on my ignore list, but I do ignore quite a few posters and immediately skim past their posts. Because I know if I read them I'll get annoyed and feel compelled to reply! But I've learned nothing I say, no matter how intelligent or articulate I think my argument might be, nothing I say will ever change these people's minds!

This is exactly the kind of poster that I think Boards should be looking to get rid of.

Because not everybody has your self-control, these posters do get replied to, and replied to, and replied to, and that kind of nonsense diminishes the quality of discussion on the site, and the quality of poster experience on the site, and eventually, the extent to which posters engage with the forum/site in general.

When I see you acknowledge the existence of that kind of poster, I wonder - what do you think are the benefits of their continued presence on the site?

To use the analogy that has been used so often - that of a pub - if there is a particular customer whose presence makes many other customer's experience worse, to the point that they stop coming to that pub for as long/as often/at all, the owner won't be long getting rid of that customer.

Easier said then done, you can ignore it and then one slip up and you are gone.

Surely Mods must take into account posters who have very high counts for reporting others.

If they are reporting people at a high rate they are either very sensitive or playing a role in the threads that is causing those issues.

In my experience and from reading threads they usually are both.

It is not even subtle, most regulars know who they are, maybe they are great at keeping inside the rules while ruining every thread they step into.

Getting rid of these posters will make life easier for Mods.

We are all human and it's easy to say ignore it.

yeah it is being tracked as a bug, update here:

If a person reports a lot, they're at fault? They could equally be choosing to not engage with the posters who are causing the problems and reporting clear rules violations.

This narrative is being pushed by a “certain cohort”. The issue isn’t them breaking the rules with how they post, and getting sanctioned, for this, it’s the people reporting the posts that, they think, are the problem.

This is, even, after the mods/admins have, specifically, requested that users report any post they feel is in “breach” of the charter/rules.

Some of them are not staying inside the rules, they blatantly engage in uncivil posting and attacking posters and not the post, however their conduct is not punished.

Its not even subtle and they post in this manner on a very regular basis, there is only one logical conclusion as to why this is tolerated.

Not a contradiction at all, it's fairly clear.

When posters are spreading lies and misinformation, I will point it out.

When they respond I simply ignore them and avoid getting dragged in like they want.

Tbh, if a mod is in a postion where they are thinking that 'this poster is ruining every thread but just staying inside the rules', then the rules need revising. 'Ruining threads' should be something actionable.

"Ruining a thread" is highly subjective though. It could be a difficult square to circle if you're looking in greater stringency in the application of rules that will always be highly subjective.

Just to be clear, I think people who post in bad faith and make attempts to rise people have nothing to be proud of, but, sometimes I feel, as an example, if Poster A frequently posts in bad faith, but knows the art of staying inside the lines -and poster B in response, who posts in good faith in opposition, but can't stay inside those lines - then I feel maybe there's an onus on poster B to display a bit of self control too and not always rise to the bait.