State of the Board Discussion [Moved to Here]

[lancerman]

I thought that perhaps @lancerman was a political candidate running for office (given this "sales pitch"). Initially I thought: "How exciting to have a political candidate running for office on Patsfan.com!!". He certainly promises to fix all issues like a political candidate!!

.....But then I realized that he didn't ask for any money.

If you would like to donate I can share my venmo information. I promise I will use it on my campaign and not funnel it to any investments.

 

[zydecochris]

If you would like to donate I can share my venmo information. I promise I will use it on my campaign and not funnel it to any investments.

I’m afraid that’s a hard “no”, after my Mother in Law sent money to some web address in response to a text claiming to be a major political candidate (“see, it has to be him, it has an official looking picture of him”) and now for some reason she gets about 30 texts per day asking for a donation in response to some political outrage that ranges from merely grossly exaggerated to completely made up.

 

[Kontradiction]

I’m afraid that’s a hard “no”, after my Mother in Law sent money to some web address in response to a text claiming to be a major political candidate (“see, it has to be him, it has an official looking picture of him”) and now for some reason she gets about 30 texts per day asking for a donation in response to some political outrage that ranges from merely grossly exaggerated to completely made up.

 

[PatsWSB47]

Lol, that's your poster child for bulsht fundraising?

 

[Kontradiction]

Lol, that's your poster child for bulsht fundraising?

What? That’s Joe Bidin.

 

[Huckleberry1]

The primary issue I have is with those who have an agenda, and never let it go. NEM was the best example of this, it didn’t matter what the discussion was about he was going to go off on the offense and insist that he knew better. DKF was the more recent glaring example of this, and no matter if the discussion was about special teams or the linebackers he was going to turn it into bashing MacDaniels. I have nothing good to say about the trolls, or those who are always as negative as possible, but the ones with an agenda they won’t stop hammering on are definitely the worst.

 

[TomPatriot]

Not to hijack the thread but my favorite non-fan poster was Pherein.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Not to hijack the thread but my favorite non-fan poster was Pherein.

Pherein was a Saints fan, right?

 

[203Pat]

This forum seems to have more features for ignoring/muting posters you don't want to read. Not sure we need much more than we already have.

 

[jimnance]

This forum seems to have more features for ignoring/muting posters you don't want to read. Not sure we need much more than we already have.

I've never used any of those so I agree there's more than enough.
I really don't understand the need for any if them incl. ignore.
If there's a known troll in a thread I just don't read what they posted. Simple.
90% of the posters that I disagree with most often are not trolls. We just disagree. I pretty much know who the real trolls are so I pretty much don't read em or respond. It's not rocket science

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

The primary issue I have is with those who have an agenda, and never let it go. NEM was the best example of this, it didn’t matter what the discussion was about he was going to go off on the offense and insist that he knew better. DKF was the more recent glaring example of this, and no matter if the discussion was about special teams or the linebackers he was going to turn it into bashing MacDaniels. I have nothing good to say about the trolls, or those who are always as negative as possible, but the ones with an agenda they won’t stop hammering on are definitely the worst.

Just keep the agendas out the threads. Like I don't need to hear about Josh McDaniels in my 2019 LB thread in the draft forum. And that's exactly what every post was.

I mean posters know where each other stand and who doesn't care for who. It doesn't need to be carried into every single thread.

Also good trolls are funny. Not annoying virgins who add nothing but whinging. They add a little humor and sarcasm to a crazy sport and fandom.

I think the issues will work themselves out and hopefully the team provides a positive distraction to right the ship.

 

[Bill Lee]

I've never used any of those so I agree there's more than enough.
I really don't understand the need for any if them incl. ignore.
If there's a known troll in a thread I just don't read what they posted. Simple.
90% of the posters that I disagree with most often are not trolls. We just disagree. I pretty much know who the real trolls are so I pretty much don't read em or respond. It's not rocket science

To me, this equates to "I don't mind having to dodge piles of dog during my walk, it's still a nice walk to me".

Personally, I'd rather make it so I don't have to dodge piles of during my walk.

Too much and I'm gonna find a new place to walk, plenty of other places to go.

Apparently @Ian feels the same way since he implemented the features that get rid of the .

I imagine he did this so other people also don't leave because of all the .

Personally I would have gotten rid of all the owners who don't pick up after their dogs, but IMO Ian is trying to meet everyone half way.

PS: I also use "mute words" on Twitter, it's a glorious feature.

 

[catent]

This forum has sucked since like 2012. There were still 3 rings coming and the mods let’s Brady-trashing from fake fans and all sorts of other Felger bull**** become a dominant feature..

A bunch of you clowns wanted to move on to Jimmy G lol.

It became too big a part of the forum and the same spirit lives on lol.

Who are these bunch of clowns that wanted to move onto Jimmy G?

 

[Ian]

To me, this equates to "I don't mind having to dodge piles of dog during my walk, it's still a nice walk to me".

Personally, I'd rather make it so I don't have to dodge piles of during my walk.

Too much and I'm gonna find a new place to walk, plenty of other places to go.

Apparently @Ian feels the same way since he implemented the features that get rid of the .

I imagine he did this so other people also don't leave because of all the .

Personally I would have gotten rid of all the owners who don't pick up after their dogs, but IMO Ian is trying to meet everyone half way.

PS: I also use "mute words" on Twitter, it's a glorious feature.

That's the reason I put together the mute vs the ignore...it's a little less invasive. It's an easy way for people to control what they do/don't want to see in a thread without having to ignore a user board-wide since there are some people who are great in the majority of threads and sometimes just happen to get into a bad disagreement that sometimes can take over a thread. This, hopefully, has made that much easier to deal with.

 

[PatsWSB47]

That's the reason I put together the mute vs the ignore...it's a little less invasive. It's an easy way for people to control what they do/don't want to see in a thread without having to ignore a user board-wide since there are some people who are great in the majority of threads and sometimes just happen to get into a bad disagreement that sometimes can take over a thread. This, hopefully, has made that much easier to deal with.

It's a great feature

 

[Steve102]

What the hell did I miss??

 

[Bill Lee]

That's the reason I put together the mute vs the ignore...it's a little less invasive. It's an easy way for people to control what they do/don't want to see in a thread without having to ignore a user board-wide since there are some people who are great in the majority of threads and sometimes just happen to get into a bad disagreement that sometimes can take over a thread. This, hopefully, has made that much easier to deal with.

I think the mute is a good feature, but I still tend to go to ignore rather than mute.

I find I can take someone having a bad day or someone having a different opinion than I do on a given thread.

For some posters after a while it just gets to the point of having to ignore them to keep them from ruining the experience for me.

It usually comes down to severe trolling behavior, or severe disrespect of me or of other users.

I some times read the ignored content but find these posters don't change.

The things that turn me off about them seem to be a part of who they are rather them having a bad day.

Yet, yeah, maybe there will be threads going forward where mute is the thing to do, so I thank you for developing it.

 

[Bill Lee]

What the hell did I miss??

Please try to aim better!

 

[jimnance]

To me, this equates to "I don't mind having to dodge piles of dog during my walk, it's still a nice walk to me".

Personally, I'd rather make it so I don't have to dodge piles of during my walk.

Too much and I'm gonna find a new place to walk, plenty of other places to go.

Apparently @Ian feels the same way since he implemented the features that get rid of the .

I imagine he did this so other people also don't leave because of all the .

Personally I would have gotten rid of all the owners who don't pick up after their dogs, but IMO Ian is trying to meet everyone half way.

PS: I also use "mute words" on Twitter, it's a glorious feature.

It's cool man. Some of us are just more nimble dog-walkers than others.

 

[PScottman]

This forum seems to have more features for ignoring/muting posters you don't want to read. Not sure we need much more than we already have.

Now there's a coding challenge for Ian.

I'd like a "partial ignore" feature...we can call it the "married for years" (posting for years?) button where people can talk about anything they want for hours/posts on end and when finally finished the only response is a half-hearted "Sure, I'll get to it in a minute." which may or may not even relate to what was being discussed.