A Cattle Call Section Instead of Being on Repeated @Lists

[Mojo2]

I don't mind being mentioned. This just isn't a big deal to me. Sorry Mojo.

I can help illustrate the offending dynamic.

Starting tonite.

Until you come to recognize my irritation.

I have a low tolerance for being called of nonsense.

Like a telephone solicitor some people don't mind but who others just won't tolerate.

The issue is NOT that a little irritation bothers me and it takes a lot for you to be bothered, it's that everyone has a different threshold and the question is raised: Should USMB address this issue now or wait until later?

The consensus would probably say, "wait til later."

If at all.

I get it.

But I want you all to really feel where I'm coming from so i will try to help in that regard.

Tough

Fucking

Shit

Are you displaying a contemptuous attitude toward me for this?

I've felt like an aggrieved party here looking for a way to alleviate an annoyance.

And you respond by telling me this?

Come on now.

It's me.

I'm not some dipstick, okay?

That's how you respond to someone for whom you feel contempt.

Is that REALLY how you feel about me and my problem???

Really?

 

[Pogo]

Yeah well consider the source: the high priest of the Contrarian Church.

 

[flacaltenn]

When this was first implemented there were some bugs. I actually figured out then how to trun off the shit that was bugging me. If only other people had the same ability to figure out how to fix things instead of whinging like a 3 year old girl.

Another feature that I don't understand is that when I put out a mention on somebody else, SOMETIMES I get an alert in "mentions" for the mention that I posted.. But only sometimes.

It's truly mysterious in some of its workings.

 

[Grandma]

Mojo, ever hear of the Don't Call List?

Just put "Do not @ me, please" in your sig and on your About Me box under Interests. If someone mentions you, PM them and tell them to stop.

Not difficult.

 

[Wake]

Agreed with Grandma.

Personally I prefer it being used to either mention individual members, or as a massive list only for very well-thought-out OPs. Say you spend a good deal of time writing a quality argument/essay on a topic, and you want everyone to chime in and enjoy the ensuing discussion. That, my friends, is a good way to use it. Not for relatively unimportant or trivial things. It just makes discussions that much more enjoyable when you invite a great deal of people to discover your OP you put a lot of time and finesse into.

 

[Mojo2]

Mojo, ever hear of the Don't Call List?

Just put "Do not @ me, please" in your sig and on your About Me box under Interests. If someone mentions you, PM them and tell them to stop.

Not difficult.

Does everyone check a person's About Me box before making a cattle call list?

I would bet not.

And if I have to go through the process of telling everyone on USMB not to @mention me on their cattle call list there would always be a new person to tell because there's always SOMEONE who doesn't get the memo or read it or follow it.

Quick, without looking, can you tell me what my sig says?

My point is that many people ignore sigs, too.

It's not difficult but it's also not likely to work.

There has to be a more mature solution. And by mature i mean an idea which has been thought out BEYOND the first impulse as to what we THINK should work.

Maybe instead of mature I should say, "aged".

 

[Wake]

If this @mention thing were to become a problem in the future, maybe it could be remedied with a stickied "Do Not @" list for all to see. Violating that list would result in a warning, first. Perhaps that could be a good fix, should that happen?

 

[strollingbones]

i just told people to stop that shit......when rat told me what it was and how to check it and i found 3 pages of that mess....

do what i do....i wont ever check it again....simple as that...no one can make you use the feature

 

[Pogo]

Agreed with Grandma.

Personally I prefer it being used to either mention individual members, or as a massive list only for very well-thought-out OPs. Say you spend a good deal of time writing a quality argument/essay on a topic, and you want everyone to chime in and enjoy the ensuing discussion. That, my friends, is a good way to use it. Not for relatively unimportant or trivial things. It just makes discussions that much more enjoyable when you invite a great deal of people to discover your OP you put a lot of time and finesse into.

I think the only time I ever used it in a multiple form was a thread (not even mine) on a topic that I thought was worthy enough to be elevated above the simpleminded sniping war that it was up to that point, so I targeted specific posters on both sides who I thought might have ideas on the actual topic. It worked; the thread got a lot better.

Now, I have no idea who didn't respond to those invitations and no desire to analyze to that degree. It's an invitation, nothing more. It's irrational to think every invitation invokes a responsibility to respond, any more than one is required to respond to every advertisement one sees or hears in the course of a day.

 

[Wake]

Agreed with Grandma.

Personally I prefer it being used to either mention individual members, or as a massive list only for very well-thought-out OPs. Say you spend a good deal of time writing a quality argument/essay on a topic, and you want everyone to chime in and enjoy the ensuing discussion. That, my friends, is a good way to use it. Not for relatively unimportant or trivial things. It just makes discussions that much more enjoyable when you invite a great deal of people to discover your OP you put a lot of time and finesse into.

I think the only time I ever used it in a multiple form was a thread (not even mine) on a topic that I thought was worthy enough to be elevated above the simpleminded sniping war that it was up to that point, so I targeted specific posters on both sides who I thought might have ideas on the actual topic. It worked; the thread got a lot better.

Now, I have no idea who didn't respond to those invitations and no desire to analyze to that degree. It's an invitation, nothing more. It's irrational to think every invitation invokes a responsibility to respond, any more than one is required to respond to every advertisement one sees or hears in the course of a day.

Same as I think, only you said it much better.

 

[Mojo2]

If this @mention thing were to become a problem in the future, maybe it could be remedied with a stickied "Do Not @" list for all to see. Violating that list would result in a warning, first. Perhaps that could be a good fix, should that happen?

I'd be okay with that because I think it would work well for all concerned.

 

[Pogo]

If this @mention thing were to become a problem in the future, maybe it could be remedied with a stickied "Do Not @" list for all to see. Violating that list would result in a warning, first. Perhaps that could be a good fix, should that happen?

But then I'd have to stop typing this post that genericposter might be interested in, go consult some other separate page to see if genericposter (or genericposter2 or genericposter3 etc) were on the list before mentioning them, just because one member doesn't want to be bothered reading/ignoring his own notifications?

Think about that. It's kind of absurd. Does an individual have not only the right to not be inconvenienced, but to change the entire site inconveniencing everyone else, just because he can't say no to his own notifications?

 

[Ava]

If this @mention thing were to become a problem in the future, maybe it could be remedied with a stickied "Do Not @" list for all to see. Violating that list would result in a warning, first. Perhaps that could be a good fix, should that happen?

It's already become a nuisance for me. I have asked posters to please leave me out of it all. I don't go to the threads. I feel a little guilty because some very good people [read well-intentioned] have @mentioned me. But I have to walk the talk.

 

[Ava]

If anyone doesn't want to be mentioned by me, please let me know and I'll respect your wishes.

**Holding hand up.**

I do feel it is up to the individual disliking these things, to do something about it in a private way. Others love it, so I wouldn't advocate for getting rid of it.

"To all your questions, you are the answer. To all your problems, you are the solution. "

 

[Ropey]

If anyone doesn't want to be mentioned by me, please let me know and I'll respect your wishes.

**Holding hand up.**

I do feel it is up to the individual disliking these things, to do something about it in a private way. Others love it, so I wouldn't advocate for getting rid of it.

"To all your questions, you are the answer. To all your problems, you are the solution. "

A Cattle Call Section

To remain true to the OP, there's no moo about it.

 

[Mojo2]

If anyone doesn't want to be mentioned by me, please let me know and I'll respect your wishes.

**Holding hand up.**

I do feel it is up to the individual disliking these things, to do something about it in a private way. Others love it, so I wouldn't advocate for getting rid of it.

"To all your questions, you are the answer. To all your problems, you are the solution. "

A Cattle Call Section

To remain true to the OP, there's no moo about it.

Maybe a "Moink?"

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpC3LRDbdYY]FUNNY SUPER BOWL TV COMMERCIAL Moink Jacks Farm Bacon Insider? Jack in the Box® - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Wake]

If anyone doesn't want to be mentioned by me, please let me know and I'll respect your wishes.

**Holding hand up.**

I do feel it is up to the individual disliking these things, to do something about it in a private way. Others love it, so I wouldn't advocate for getting rid of it.

"To all your questions, you are the answer. To all your problems, you are the solution. "

Well put. I like that quote, too. If I may, who said that, please?

 

[Wake]

If this @mention thing were to become a problem in the future, maybe it could be remedied with a stickied "Do Not @" list for all to see. Violating that list would result in a warning, first. Perhaps that could be a good fix, should that happen?

I'd be okay with that because I think it would work well for all concerned.

That sounds good. If it could be done, maybe the best option of all would be to let members be able to turn off the @mention function themselves, in order to not be mentioned. That would likely be the est remedy... if practical? A list would be the next best thing.

If this @mention thing were to become a problem in the future, maybe it could be remedied with a stickied "Do Not @" list for all to see. Violating that list would result in a warning, first. Perhaps that could be a good fix, should that happen?

But then I'd have to stop typing this post that genericposter might be interested in, go consult some other separate page to see if genericposter (or genericposter2 or genericposter3 etc) were on the list before mentioning them, just because one member doesn't want to be bothered reading/ignoring his own notifications?

Think about that. It's kind of absurd. Does an individual have not only the right to not be inconvenienced, but to change the entire site inconveniencing everyone else, just because he can't say no to his own notifications?

Hm... I'm not sure. My stance on this issue is making very well-thought-out posts on various issues, and then use massive @Lists to kindle the fires of a good discussion. Extreme bias in favor of using the "@mentions" aside, it's tough to brush off how those members who don't want to be mentioned feel about it. It's sort of reminiscent (a little bit?) of telemarketing. If some people don't like being bothered by the calls, they can and should be able to go on a "DO Not Call List." Earlier during this discussion I didn't really care about their concerns, but having been mentioned quite a few times (it didn't bother me), I can understand how those who get annoyed by it would feel over time.

Would it be fair to say it'd be considerate to keep their wishes in mind? My SOP is to construct a relatively decent OP. Afterwards, create an @List. Then, after that, assuming the "Don't @" list exists, compare and subtract those names. They may not know of your consideration, but methinks they'd be grateful if they knew you had their wishes in mind. I can see how it'd be annoying, especially if the frequency and rate is magnified. What we may all be able to agree on is that the function itself is extremely valuable if used to promote meaningful discussion. Bar none. It's the best function imho.

As to if and how to go forward, with these various things in mind, hell if I know. Staff'll deal with this as they see fit.

If this @mention thing were to become a problem in the future, maybe it could be remedied with a stickied "Do Not @" list for all to see. Violating that list would result in a warning, first. Perhaps that could be a good fix, should that happen?

It's already become a nuisance for me. I have asked posters to please leave me out of it all. I don't go to the threads. I feel a little guilty because some very good people [read well-intentioned] have @mentioned me. But I have to walk the talk.

That's understandable. If someone asks someone else to not mention him or her, that, at the very least, ought to be respected.

 

[Mojo2]

If this @mention thing were to become a problem in the future, maybe it could be remedied with a stickied "Do Not @" list for all to see. Violating that list would result in a warning, first. Perhaps that could be a good fix, should that happen?

I'd be okay with that because I think it would work well for all concerned.

That sounds good. If it could be done, maybe the best option of all would be to let members be able to turn off the @mention function themselves, in order to not be mentioned. That would likely be the est remedy... if practical? A list would be the next best thing.



Hm... I'm not sure. My stance on this issue is making very well-thought-out posts on various issues, and then use massive @Lists to kindle the fires of a good discussion. Extreme bias in favor of using the "@mentions" aside, it's tough to brush off how those members who don't want to be mentioned feel about it. It's sort of reminiscent (a little bit?) of telemarketing. If some people don't like being bothered by the calls, they can and should be able to go on a "DO Not Call List." Earlier during this discussion I didn't really care about their concerns, but having been mentioned quite a few times (it didn't bother me), I can understand how those who get annoyed by it would feel over time.

Would it be fair to say it'd be considerate to keep their wishes in mind? My SOP is to construct a relatively decent OP. Afterwards, create an @List. Then, after that, assuming the "Don't @" list exists, compare and subtract those names. They may not know of your consideration, but methinks they'd be grateful if they knew you had their wishes in mind. I can see how it'd be annoying, especially if the frequency and rate is magnified. What we may all be able to agree on is that the function itself is extremely valuable if used to promote meaningful discussion. Bar none. It's the best function imho.

As to if and how to go forward, with these various things in mind, hell if I know. Staff'll deal with this as they see fit.

If this @mention thing were to become a problem in the future, maybe it could be remedied with a stickied "Do Not @" list for all to see. Violating that list would result in a warning, first. Perhaps that could be a good fix, should that happen?

It's already become a nuisance for me. I have asked posters to please leave me out of it all. I don't go to the threads. I feel a little guilty because some very good people [read well-intentioned] have @mentioned me. But I have to walk the talk.

That's understandable. If someone asks someone else to not mention him or her, that, at the very least, ought to be respected.

Fine post. Great insight, ideas and sentiments.

Now, how to notify everyone of this point we've reached?

I know! Send everyone a @mention from this thread!

LOLOL

 

[Moonglow]

This is a circle jerk thread??