As far as I know that information is not even available to the mentors.caz said:It would be nice if when we click on a user’s name if we could see the number (not names) of people who were ignoring the user.
I would respond that there are three or four users over the past couple of years that I wish that I had not paid any attention to. Most of them were eventually banned. Providing the information would provide them with unbiased information from peers which might inspire them to mend their ways and also provide warning to some of PF’s stronger personalities to help prevent some of the confrontations that lead to banning.Greg Bernhardt said:Interesting, but a negative metric that could be uncomfortable for many
I think a better way is for users to make use of the "report a post" feature so the staff can handle them professionally.caz said:I would respond that there are three or four users over the past couple of years that I wish that I had not paid any attention to. Most of them were eventually banned.
Double-#Paul Colby said:People would have to pester me a great deal before I would ignore them.
test: in the last reply I made in the quantum forum it refused to format the latex. #2+2=4# what gives? Feel free to ignore this.
I think it would put people off. New users and regular users, the non Scientists would feel stupid and self conscious and god forbid a big hitter got an 'ignored' against their name.caz said:I would respond that there are three or four users over the past couple of years that I wish that I had not paid any attention to. Most of them were eventually banned. Providing the information would provide them with unbiased information from peers which might inspire them to mend their ways and also provide warning to some of PF’s stronger personalities to help prevent some of the confrontations that lead to banning.
I think that in an effort to be helpful, we sometimes enable behaviors that are detrimental.
Maybe the count should only be for the previous month so that people are not tarred with youthful indiscretions.
Would the feedback on the posts not provide that kind of information?Paul Colby said:It might be useful for oneself to know the number of people ignoring you? I guess maybe ##N## people find you useless and annoying isn’t very uplifting for ##N>0.##
I was referring to comments in terms of content. The vast majority of my upvoted are not Science related. Music, general stuff.Paul Colby said:Certainly, the ratio of messages to reaction score is sufficient information. I'm impressed by yours, BTW.